TC 




Ca /\: 


no7 a 


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 


-'•4 4 


OF THE 


JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS 


APPOINTED BY THE 


LEGISLATURE OE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 


MARCH 14,1907 


With an Appendix Containing Reports from the Harbors 

of the State 


% 



SACRAMENTO: 

W. W. SHANNON, I SUPERINTENDENT STATE PRINTING. 

. 1908 . 

17 . 








































O N O 



> A v 

*o ^ « 


* » , t 0 ’ a?* 


o N a 



4* * 

A s • • 

°. ^ ; 

* <£ \ °o 

* ^ 4» * 

J. ' * « » <G o * O a * 

* n V L / * 

*• 4 * c U t * _ __ ♦ O c 

ui A », ^r/ 7 l///y 2 7> ■» 

* ^ 0* 





o \0 rf\ 

' ^ v\ <t 

0 * n 0 

°"° A 0 <K 

„ ^ p y * °* > A 

• £ *'}M£\ % £ '' 

^ v * $£$Wyil vv 

v^ :«§. ^ *. 



r ♦*'** 

* <r«SX\ „ <► ^ 

^ <a •v^auii # . * v / 


o y 



•> A ^ «ipi^C^ o \0 -r, > * 4 o. • 

♦ k> >* wJJwvv'^ ' y (7. * <£yy/,l\)sv > -CL' *£* ^ 

■» <L* > O g> nWy^« f\ *^*, . /r<^ * N v _ 'f 

.V s .. <2* 0W ° V *-’• / O, *MO 

V iLL^**/* cl . 9™ „« • o, ^ a v -s*«^ ai 








<* *£. A ^-’ 

■V .$* ♦ 

vPy ■* 

^ '^vT' v ° * A^'^V j 

* :.>• /i * • 5 ^’ .o* * • 4 

1 •% °o .-^ .‘Jil*% ^ . 0 ^ . l ".. '"o . 4 ’ e 0 »» 

n <, ^SSAVh%.vP V. vj £^/r79^ * ^ * 






O K 









<** V^> 

* 

: o^ ; 

, ^ °*' iPv, 

„ „, Q 0 ^ f,» <f.K O ^ * 

^ w • % y*Xte>+ y % '"’ V v 

° A vP o <* A V»\ j 

> H O A \ %> * * * * < 0 O 

^ .0 *.• ' * o A g° n °+ ^ t»® ^ 

I. - ~^ 7 - ■» O * r~S^Vv *P t* * - °-> 

v^. 4 1^ O rr\ ^^S5v\\l I xiV. u> -^P 4l 4 « ff/AvvO 

v r ^ s 74'-v 'o. 0 V ' I* y * 0 - ,,f > \^ v 5**, ^ 



*' 4^%. ”»: 






^ ^ CL ^ 


N 0 ' A 0 

% *y*' > v *••• 

A y >Vi % ^ A 

<^ aV«^ 

o 


¥ o 



^ - „^ XI . / A ^ yv v 

. s£> <Z> *0 * * * <\ ^ ♦ 

^ ^ r Or « 1 ' a -» ^o «A 0 N o ^ 

^4, « •'JKW/tyy* * .44. aN V - •- 



^ A*' ^ 





o> A 

Ku '« 

<* 

!• 

% 



^b ^ ; 

\0 v*. *• 

^ V 4*. a 

r\ ^ 

0 N 0 0 ,0 ; ^ ^ 

4? v 

^ -SHI©-. '%/ ^ 

% »yjw /\ 

^ 'Op*- A, ♦. 

°o ,# S^:%\ ■">.•-*. -o 



^0* . 

N A ^ «’ 

4* * a b' o ^ 

% "’ v < s .., % *°"~°v 0 ' 

**. .# .vsto*-. * 

* v*V 






^ \T>, ° 

±y a*. 


' — s' ,G 


r ,<? % •• 



* -ts A‘ 

A ♦ 

vP ^ • t 


aV*^, 

A ^ ^ ^ 
4 <\ 


'^4 'O • A " <\ > 

4 A .ON.^ 









, *4 

~ ^ ' 9 ' 1 " ^ O' 0 « 0 ' OJ <J> e , 1 * 

C\ <0 P * * x> V *i!pL'* C\ JT P Y * 0 x- 4/ **' 

™0?1o ^ A v * Qlk^ * ^ ^ ♦J' 



V y a? 

’ vv 0 ^!5fe<: ^ v 

IWf.* ' 



*> ’•£*. a t> p 

• ^f» CA *. 

: o' v 


* A V-^\. -* 

* A > 'v'V o 



<* 

j-» .C^% ^ 

<n << ^sVvAV^o' ^. 
-t,*^ ° <i\^ ^flll/ ^% «• 



V .*1^% cv 0 V P y *°- N> V .*L! 

\/ : w *" ^ ^ 

^ ** v \ V 




'p '^£- ^ <L 

/V 

< J - * 0 A° , *£* 

x ry « *• ' * -9 *0 

, C° ,Vv^% ^ ,<T * 

: *^d* ^Ctr o 




> *•/-.•' ^ 0c v ^°° , ^ '° No ^ 

^ v % **V1> c\ ,<T p;*°- x> V *1^* C\ <0 V ** 

^ ^ ^ y^V/k\ ^ ^ ^ 

: 0 ^'V *°WW; 

.A '<».** A <? ( 

L / rt *' 0 A V . 0 N o - *"<£> p»> , t 1 » ^ c o N o ^ x^> 





/\ °^C^“ ^ • 

^ ... 'V "•* A' ... ^ 


* a • <\ a;V< 5 ,o' 





VA 



. e f O 









V 


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS * u 6 

//o 6-ST 8 


Exhibit 



l 


JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS 


APPOINTED BY THE 

LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 


MARCH 14, 1907 


With an Appendix Containing Reports from the Harbors 

of the State 



SACRAMENTO: 


w. w. shannon, : : : : superintendent state printing. 

1908 . 










COMMITTEE: 


Senator LEROY A. WRIGHT 
Senator E. I. WOLFE 
Senator T. J. KENNEDY 
Assemblyman WALTER LEEDS 
Assemblyman PERCY JOHNSON 
Assemblyman LOUIS STROHL 

j3y 


MAR 25 1917 




l 



REPORT 


To the Legislature of the State of California: 

On March 14, 1907, the Legislature adopted the following Senate 
Concurrent Resolution No. 3: 

Whereas, The constant increasing commerce of the ports of California demands 
greater facilities for the handling of shipping; and 

YS hereas, The interests of the entire State are affected by the harbors of the 
State, be it 

Resolved, That a special committee of six members be appointed from the Legis¬ 
lature of the State of California, consisting of three members from the Senate, to 
be appointed by the President thereof, and three members from the Assembly, to be 
appointed by the Speaker thereof, to investigate the conditions of the harbors of the 
State and to make recommendations for legislation necessary to be enacted at the 
next session of the Legislature ; 

Resolved, That it is the sense of the Legislature that the report should be com¬ 
prehensive in all respects, and that it should include not only existing conditions 
and facilities, but also recommendations for financing future permanent improve¬ 
ments ; 

Resolved, That the said joint committee shall have the power to subpoena witnesses 
and to send for persons and papers, and to issue subpoenas when necessary; 

Resolved, That the necessary traveling and incidental expenses of said joint com¬ 
mittee shall be paid out of the contingent expenses of the respective houses. 

At the sixth semiannual meeting of the Counties Committee of the 
California Promotion Committee, held at Coronado, San Diego County, 
on December 15, 1906, a resolution was adopted asking for the appoint¬ 
ment of a legislative committee to inquire into the conditions and needs 
of the harbors of the State of California, and to report a comprehensive 
plan to the Legislature for the improvement of said harbors in order 
to facilitate commerce. In compliance with this action the above con¬ 
current resolution was adopted by the Legislature of 1907, and Senators 
Leroy A. Wright, E. I. Wolfe, and T. J. Kennedy, and Assemblymen 
Walter Leeds, Percy Johnson, and Louis Strohl were appointed on 
such joint committee by the presiding officers of the respective houses. 

All the members of the committee attended sessions held at San 
Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, Oakland, Eureka, Port San Luis, 
and Newport Beach, making personal examination of the present physi¬ 
cal conditions and consulting with the officials of the various ports as 
to the work that can be properly done by the State in the way of 
permanent improvements. Joint meetings have been held with the 
Harbor Commissioners of San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, and 



4 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 




Eureka, at which present conditions were exhaustively entered into. 
There have also been consultations with Engineers Luther Wagoner 
and Col. W. H. Heuer, U. S. A., representing the Federated Harbor 
Improvement Association of San Francisco, and also with officials and 
members of commercial bodies at Oakland, San Diego, San Pedro, Port 
San Luis, Newport Beach, and Los Angeles. In its work of informing 
itself the committee has been aided by officials and residents at all the 
ports visited, and facts and theories have been cheerfully furnished, 
even at points where State assistance at the present time is not 
practicable. 

SAN FRANCISCO. 

V 

In San Francisco, one of the important world ports, the committee 

found such a congestion of shipping and freight that the facilities 

« 

provided through the indebtedness already incurred for the accommo¬ 
dation of vessels and the handling of freight, even though the moneys 
have been judiciously and economically expended, are entirely inade¬ 
quate to provide for the rapidly increasing business with the countries 
across the Pacific, as well as that of the coast trade along the line of 
the two Americas. As the leading port on the west coast of North 
America, San Francisco has continued the work of the earlier years in 
improvements of the harbor, and only of comparatively recent date has 
there been the idea of permanency in the construction of piers and 
docks. Where world ports of less importance than San Francisco have 
had millions of dollars expended in permanent improvements, especially 
those in European countries that have been made to meet the demands 
of future generations, the San Francisco Harbor Commissioners have 
been compelled to be most frugal in their expenditures for much needed 
improvements, having at their command only hundreds of thousands 
of dollars where there should have been millions. Much has been done 
from the earnings, and in addition pajunents have been made annually 
on principal and interest, to lessen the amount secured by loans and the 
issue of bonds. 

Having faith in themselves, their State, and their harbors, Califor¬ 
nians have not realized to the fullest extent the importance of permanent 
improvement of their ports, and, as a consequence, much of the money 
expended has been for work of a temporary character, the short life 
of which will imperatively demand future appropriations to replace 
what has been done. In the matter of piers, docks, seawalls, and bulk¬ 
heads there is no longer excuse for experimentation. The needs of the 
future, even the distant future, are known and should be anticipated. 

All the piers and docks excepting two, the Pacific Mail docks, are 
owned and operated by the State. There are thirty-one of these project- 



Flosden 


lATIOtK 


Black point 


Vallejo 


MSouth 


Ignacio 


> NlCASIO 


VALLEJO JONCTII 

? 4 T 


IILLCR 


0UJM 


Ambrose 


.Camp T/ 


Pinole 


IART 1 NE 1 Z 


Cornwall 


Maltsy 


LAOON'TAS 


Frankui 


•Pachei 


ioelmi 


)uent'in 

Molal 

IUENTIN ft 

Den D~Li 


ICHMOHO 


iookstoN j" 1 


IMIDT 


PT RlCHMl 


lOUiB 


Walnut Creei 


Buy ant 


WEST BERKELE' 


angel ii 


ShellMouni 


‘lEOMON- 


fetftom Ban/, 


IAKLANI 


DANVII 


San Ramon 


^Mission RocV> 


alameoaT^P 


ANClii 


jHunfer Pt. 


ICEANVIEW 


West 


Dublin 


Mu»*©l Rod 


ln Francisco 

T San Bruno 


Hayward^ 


Hayward 


Burlington Beach 

I IS 


Tanfora* 


Ralvern 


Brighton 


Fa h well 


i/C/V AA/C 


>n Mafeo 


Hall 


.Green Vai 


Montar 


IMESTEAD' 


FaralloneO 

pt Monfaraf 


Irvington 


etwark 


MAP 


MO WRY 


SAN FRANCISCO BAY 

and vicinity 


REDWOOD 


Da/,mtfTo-. 


f Moon Bay 


: AIROAKS 


Menlo Park 


SCALE OF MILES 


WOODSIQE 


/STANFORD JR 
UNIVERSm 


LVT1EL0 


ALVISO 




























































A 


X. 


yr' 4 flf x 


Y~ 









r,- , < 5 > ' 




tOiOAHgl 




Ot&AZtU • 












OMlvfoftat* ma£ "OdY^r «maDj 

../v 




XAA 3 ? 


'"X. 




iA^Afl MA$ 


r o. 




y/ ~ F ^-aSu 

7 f 







Op.- 

■. • 4 “' - ■ 

^ ,- 4 •■■-ane- J&* 

£cy nromt©;*^,: V : -\ // , y 

%Wos* ^IPP )//' y^3X*OC^ 

/ X X -'r /' '-- . ../»KU-=M^iJAJ 

•X S s «• *'■**&/ 

/ / /*S> xv 

i > X - >£.. jCOOW-U<Myy..< \ ( \ ■'. ~ 

. *!*XV T '7# W, \ #1 ?** 


^T' M JOa_' 


VT ru 












>y 

'*^Mu /! 

* s - -, • * 

St 

• Sh * 























REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


O 


ing piers, and in addition there are 6,629 lineal feet of bulkhead 
wharfage, making an aggregate length of 25,229 lineal feet of wharfage. 
The average cost of maintenance during the past five years has been 
approximately $170,000 a year, not including dredging. Your com¬ 
mittee understands the annual cost to include all fixed charges and the 
reduction of indebtedness. At the present time the actual indebtedness 
amounts to $1,525,672.95, of which sum $125,672.95 is what is known 
as “deferred payment,” which will be cleared in 1911. Payment of 
$50,000, with 4 per cent interest, will clear the $250,000 borrowed from 
the school fund after the San Francisco disaster. The sum of $600,000, 
known as the depot bond issue, will expire in 1911 and disappear from 
the indebtedness. Of the seawall fund of $2,000,000, authorized bonds, 
the sum of $250,000 was issued in 1906, and in 1908 the further amount 
of $500,000 was issued. The remaining $1,250,000 will be issued as 
needed in the work of extending the seawall which is now under con¬ 
struction. The income of the port provides for all the fixed charges, 
being the current expenses and the redemption fund and interest. 

Your committee will not enter into the cost of piers and docks, owing 
to the diversified form of construction, the variation in cost being from 
50 cents to $2.90 a square foot. By referring to the answer to question 
10 in the report of the San Francisco Harbor Commissioners this matter 
of cost can be studied in detail. It will be found, in comparing the cost 
and the length of life of piers, that the cheaper kind is the more expen¬ 
sive. One kind has an average life of only a few years, while the con¬ 
crete structures have indefinite durability extending into generations. 
The concrete docks and piers are in good condition, needing but little in 
the w T ay of repair, while the wooden ones are in range, as to condition, 
from good to the verge of collapse, according to the few years they 
have been in use. 

The present dockage is inadequate. The seawall should be imme¬ 
diately extended from the union depot to pier 42, a distance of 5,160 
feet, which work is being built under the $2,000,000 bond issue already 
authorized. One thousand feet of this wall extending northerly from 
pier 42 is nearing* completion. There should follow the reconstruction 
of at least twelve of the old piers, and ail addition of four new ones. 
That these should be constructed of cement follows from the mere fact 
that existing piers are now ready to be replaced by new ones. This 
work will eventually cost $5,000,000. In addition to the accommodation 
of shipping, with its attendant income, there will follow th6 reclaiming 
of seawall lots and property valued at more than $2,000,000. It will 
be noticed that of the $2,000,000 in bonds authorized for the extension 
of the seawall there remains at the present time the sum of $1,250,000 
that is yet to be sold as required. 


6 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


The pierhead line should be redrawn to include the whole of China 
Basin, followed by twelve or more piers to serve the Potrero and Mission 
sections. The old piers north of the ferry house must be modernized 
at a cost of over $2,000,000. A seawall should be extended westerly 
from Taylor and East streets to the government reservation at Black 
Point, thus acquiring valuable seawall lots and pier sites, demanded by 
the commercial extension along North Beach. The whole of this work 
done in a permanent manner will cost approximately $20,000,000. 

The dockage charges at San Francisco are moderate, and compare 
favorably with those of any other port in the world (see answers to 
questions 20 and 21 in report of San Francisco Harbor Commissioners). 

It has been said that San Francisco is one of the important ports of 
the world. This may be seen from the imports and exports for the 
fiscal year ending June 30, 1907. There were shipped to foreign ports 
1,613,822 tons of freight; to domestic ports, 2,744,776 tons, making a 
total of 4,358,648 tons during the year. The average imports for five 
years amounted to 3,506,395 tons a year. During the year ending 
December 31, 1907, 6,900 steam and 748 sail vessels docked at the port 
of San Francisco, having a total of 4,615,603 tonnage. Of these vessels 
3.963 steam and 729 sail were deep seagoing. 

One feature in the dockage system of San Francisco deserves especial 
notice—the ownership by the State of the belt railroad connecting the 
numerous warehouses and factories around the bay front with the 
transbay railroads. During the year 1907 over 50,000 cars were handled 
by the belt line, a uniform rate of $2 having been charged for this 
service. As shippers know, the average railroad charge for switching at 
terminal points is in the neighborhood of $5 a car. The extension of the 
seawall will naturally demand the enlargement of the belt line facilities, 
as new piers and warehouses will necessitate the extension of the rails 
of communication. 

The Harbor Commissioners of San Francisco call attention to a state 
of affairs requiring legislative action. Existing laws hold the Harbor 
Commissioners responsible for any abuse of State property, but do not 
give that board sufficient control over the same for' the abatement of 
nuisances. The Harbor Commissioners also call attention to the neces¬ 
sity for the enactment of laws compelling the Pilot Commission to make 
its report to the Governor of the State, or to the State Legislature, and 
also to the wisdom of a material reduction of pilot charges. It has been 
suggested that pilots be placed on monthly salaries instead of fees, and 
that a nominal charge be made against incoming and outgoing vessels. 
The present pilot charges are as follows: 

All vessels under 500 tons, $3 per foot draught; all vessels over 500 
tons, $3 per foot draught and 3 cents per ton for each and every ton 



government reservation 


OFTHE 


SONOMA ST.toVAN NESS AVE 


LOTT D.NORTON 
CHIEF ENCINEER. 


7 SS/Oi 

























































































REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


7 


registered measurement. In all cases where inward bound vessels are 
not spoken until inside the bar the rates of pilotage herein provided 
shall be reduced 50 per cent. Vessels engaged in the whaling or fishing 
trade shall be exempt from all pilotage, except where a pilot is actually 
engaged.” 

The Legislature of 1903 made a reduction in pilotage charges. The 
payment of monthly salaries to pilots would be the means of still further 
reduction, and any decrease in the charges upon shipping will naturally 
tend to increase the commerce of the port. 

Attention is called to the high rate that vessels docking in San Fran¬ 
cisco have to pay for the water they use. Attention is also called to 
the absence of warehouse facilities along the water front, and to the 
total lack of facilities for the handling of bulk freight. This overcharge 
and these lacking facilities naturally increase merchandise cost, to the 
detriment of California, for as the importance of the port of San 
Francisco is increased throughout the world the State of California is 
benefited. Increased commerce and the prosperity of California at 
large, even while a single port may receive the direct benefits, are insep¬ 
arable. The fixed charges under the control of the State Harbor Com- 
missioners at the port of San Francisco are reasonable and bear 
favorable comparison with those of any of the ports of the world. The 
wisdom of permitting them to remain as they are until the improvements 
contemplated are all made should at once be apparent. 


SAN DIEGO. 

• 

San Diego Bay is also destined to become one of the great shipping 
points of California, and is already one of the leading ports of call for 
the steamer lines plying between the Tehuantepec Railroad in the south 
and point further north. Having an anchorage area of 9y 2 square miles 
in the bay, with a depth of from 30 to 50 feet, and a depth of 28 feet 
over the bar at low tide, San Diego Bay, which is always a safe port 
under all weather conditions, only awaits the completion of the Eastern 
railway lines, a second one of which is now under construction, to 
become the ocean port of a vast country reaching to the Mississippi 
River and to the Gulf of Mexico. While the State owns and controls 
the tide lands, conservatively appraised at $1,691,884, the nine large 
and ten small docks and piers are owned by private parties, excepting 
a small wharf at Fort Rosecrans, which is owned by the Federal Govern¬ 
ment. San Diego now has coal bunkers of sufficient capacity to supply 
all freight and passenger steamers, and when the Federal coaling 
station with 40,000 tons capacity, under construction, shall have been 
completed, this port will have received the recognition due it as the 
rendezvous for all war vessels on the Pacific when on southern duty. 


8 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


The construction of a seawall will bring into immediate use much 
and valuable reclaimed tide lands, which will be utilized for commercial 
purposes, for warehouses and spurs of railroads, and will be the direct 
means of considerable revenue to the State. Add to these reclaimed 
lands the contemplated State wharves, which will have 30 feet of 
water, and San Diego will have ample facilities for the handling of an 
immense commerce. The present State revenue from the nine large 
private wharves is in the form of rentals for franchise privileges. This 
revenue is not large from the fact that eight of the nine wharves are 
devoted principally to the business of the corporations and companies 
owning them. All the piers are constructed of wood, and only two can 
be said to be in good condition, these two having the piles protected by 
cement covering. The piling at the Federal coaling station is of a 
more permanent character, being, like all other Government work, con¬ 
structed for the future as well as for the present, even though the first 
cost is so much the greater. 

So far as berth room is concerned, the present dock facilities are 
sufficient for immediate business demands, but there is need for struc¬ 
tures of more permanent character, and especially is there need for a 
State pier that might be used by all not having wharf facilities of 
their own. Upon completion of the San Diego and Arizona Railroad, 
now being built, the shipping demands will be largely increased. The 
construction of a State wharf, it is believed, would greatly increase the 
value of this port as a shipping point. A new wharf for the State would 
cost approximately $100,000, but this amount would be much smaller 
if the State builds a seawall and utilizes its own tide lands. The 
Federal Government is at the present time constructing a naval coaling 
station at a cost of about $250,000, and a bill is before Congress pro¬ 
viding for a dry dock. In addition to this expenditure by the Federal 
Government it is more than possible that a naval training station will 
be established at some point on the bay. While these improvements 
may not directly cause increased commerce, they will naturally have a 
bearing upon the future business of the port. 

There is room at the docks for twenty-four vessels, and the dockage 
charges are one cent per ton for 200 tons or less, three fourths cent 
per ton for balance, net register tonnage. Freight is unloaded from 
ship and loaded into cars at a cost of 50 cents per ton for merchandise, 
75 cents per thousand feet for lumber, and 60 cents per thousand feet 
for ties. Warehouse charges are subject to contract, making evident 
the desirability of and the necessity for a State wharf and State ware¬ 
houses. No demurrage charges are made. 

During the year 1907 there were 73,057 tons of freight, not including 
coal and cement, received by vessel, and 64,688,700 feet of lumber 



1230 




*»««••• 


1214 


1205 '% 


1204 


jrrrr 


•• r. : 




isga 

■ ;u is^Ra 

% lags® 

Cy crjpuT,wj 


icapaffiroaiiBtt 

SIB 


1200 




'fi® ’%"&> 


•San pn 


l.OOOip t 


1180 


1183 


TO 


'q//f^ B>, | 


^3 


SB3MS 






S®®me$333fl 




^fijv-'.vr’srj. 


US 


,-WV 

s«y 


ISrc®, 


.x'X^CsXV^' 


!)0S89 




IE03Q 

KWfTCJ 

RgiHKff 


|)|E NC.An 




p OlNT LO 


mwiwwwwri 


ruiliUIej i , 


? w u <ui ^ 

La Punt*; 




SSEESSMaBEtEE 








































































































































































































































































































































































































REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


9 


received by vessel and raft. During the same period over 40,000 tons 
of coal and nearly 15,000,000 pounds of cement were received at the 
docks. The receipts during ten months of the year 1908 prove that 
these amounts will be greatly exceeded during the year 1909, while in 
the matter of lumber the amount will be nearly if not quite doubled. 
The records for 1907 show that 10,976 tons of freight were shipped out, 
consigned to both foreign and domestic ports. 

There were 423 steamers and 80 sailing vessels that entered this port 
during the year 1907, not counting those engaged in the fishing trade. 
War vessels of this and other nations are not included among those 
figured above. 

The principal articles of import were coal, coke, pig iron, cement, 
domestic animals, copper matte, hides, guano, bran, onyx, firebrick, 
lumber, flour, feed, structural iron, iron pipe, machinery, groceries, dry 
goods and leather goods. The leading exports were honey, tallow, hides, 
pelts, fish, wool, oranges, lemons, and grain. 

The commerce of the port of San Diego is rapidly growing, owing to 
the development of southern California and the increase of imports 
from Europe and New York via Tehuantepec Railroad over the isthmus, 
and from Baja California. There is at the present time but one trans¬ 
continental railway entering this port, but the preliminary work has 
been done for a second that should be in operation within two years. 
Even before the completion of the Panama Canal a considerable 
business has been established in connection with the Tehuantepec Rail¬ 
road, this being the port of call for all steamers receiving freight from 
that Mexican line and operating in conjunction with the several Atlantic 
lines. The commerce by this line is constantly growing, the last steamer 
to dock at the Oriental wharf having discharged at the port of San 
Diego 1,900 tons of freight for distribution throughout the southwest 
territory. 

At present south bound steamers do not call at this port. Late this 
year an experimental shipment of oranges and lemons was made from 
the port of San Francisco for the purpose of determining if San Diego 
could be made an important fruit shipping point for east bound fruits. 
Oranges and lemons produced in southern California were bought in 
the open market at San Francisco and shipped East by the Tehuantepec 
line. The oranges landed in New York in first class condition, but the 
lemons were badly damaged. The officials of the Tehuantepec line, 
however, are of the opinion that the damaged condition of the lemons 
was wholly due to the fact that they were bought in the open market, 
having been intended for home consumption, and were not properly 
picked and packed for Eastern shipment. The last south bound steamer 
took eighty tons of freight which originated in the San Diego territory 


10 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


and billed to New York. As soon as the territory offers a minimum of 
two hundred tons for each steamer San Diego will be made a port of 
call for south bound steamers. Inasmuch as the territory tributary to 
San Diego produced oranges and lemons last year of the total value of 
$23,000,000, on which the railroads were paid for freight approximately 
$14,000,000, it will readily be seen that if oranges and lemons can be 
shipped with safety by the Tehuantepec steamship line a very large 
commerce will grow up in the shipment of these and other fruits through 
the port of San Diego to the East. As there is a saving of at least one 
third in freight rates on both east and west bound shipments by steam¬ 
ship line over the railroads, the importance of the establishment of this 
line of steamers will be at once apparent. It will be seen that there 
will be such an increase of shipping that greater facilities than at 
present obtain here will be necessary. 

In spite of the efforts of private individuals to secure water front 
rights that they would make perpetual, if possible, the Harbor Commis¬ 
sioners have rigidly preserved the integrity of State ownership. The 
last legislature having appropriated $10,000 for that purpose, they have 
taken steps that will enable them to enforce all the claims of the State 
to the tide lands, having instituted suits and made provision to per¬ 
petuate the testimony of witnesses in a competent court. As these tide 
lands of the State extend nearly the length of the bay, and front all 
the deep water, there is need for definite action, especially as the future 
demands and valuations will be such a large increase over the present. 

There is a total of 1,265.46 acres of these tide lands, having an 
assessed valuation of $1,691,884. The following table, taken from the 
report of the Harbor Commissioners, will show that the assessments are 
not excessive, being based on present conditions rather than on future 
possibilities: 




Assessed 



Acres. 

Value per Acre. 

Total Value. 

Tract No. 1 .... 

. 435.24 

$600 00 

$261,144 00 

Tract No. 2 ... . 

. 1G.50 

3,000 00 

49,500 00 

Tract No. 3_ 


10,000 00 

536.000 00 

Tract No. 4 .... 

. 102.20 

2,000 00 

204,040 00 

Tract No. 5 . . . . 


3,000 00 

171.600 00 

Tract No. G . .. . 

.. . 104.00 

500 00 

52.000 00 

Tract No. 7 .... 

. 171.00 

200 00 

34,200 00 

Tract No. S . . . . 

. 218.00 

300 00 

65,400 00 

Tract No. 9 . . .. 

. 72.00 

800 00 

57,600 00 

Totals . 

.1.229.56 


$1,431,484 00 

Filled by private 

individuals, but claimed for 


State-— 




Tract No. 10 . . . 

. 21.30 

$4,000 00 

85,200 00 

Tract Nor 11 . . . 

. 14. GO 

12,000 00 

175,200 00 

Grand totals . 

.1.265.4G 


$1,691,SS4 00 























X»b633 'iki m cun 







t2tfl0‘ 


& •***. „ 
V'ft •.*>* & 


HAWS 


/&* / 
f*/i,2r 






4if»f :.*r »/ « 

/ ; : . • *♦< . 

* 

f&V:x*S 

;*&t 


>#'53 *' 

». U , 


BAY 


HUMBOLDT 


/Humboldt Bay) C&G.S. 58*i* > 

















































































































































































REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


11 


Government Work .—The Federal Government has expended up to 
the present time $665,211 in the improvement of San Diego Bay, which 
has been in the way of dredging, deepening the channel across the bar, 
and the construction of jetties. Capt. Amos A. Fries, of the Corps of 
Engineers, under date of May 7, 1907, made a report to the Navy 
Department in which he made recommendation that the further sum 
of $125,000 be appropriated for dredging a deep channel 600 feet wide 
and 30 feet deep from the bar at the entrance of the harbor (over 
which there is at the present time a channel 28 feet deep at low tide), 
and 100 feet wide and 30 feet deep through the middle ground in the 
harbor, so that the sharp turns of the present channel may be avoided. 
This recommendation, taking its regular course to the Navy Department, 
has been approved by Lieut. Col. John Biddle, Corps of Engineers, 
Division Engineer; Col. D. C. Lockwood, Corps of Engineers, senior 
member of the Board; Wm. S. Cowles, Chief of Bureau of Equipment; 
C. McR. M inslow, Acting Chief of Bureau of Navigation; Admiral 
George Dewey, President General Board; J. E. Pillsbury, Chief of 
Bureau of Navigation; V. H. Metcalf, Secretary Navy Department. 
There is now nothing in the way to prevent the appropriation asked 
for, especially as it is for the benefit of the war vessels that will come 
here to coal, as well as for all vessels carrying foreign commerce which 
draw up to 2iy 2 feet of water. 


HUMBOLDT BAY. 

A careful personal inspection of Humboldt Bay reveals the possi¬ 
bilities of that port if there is proper assistance by the Federal Govern¬ 
ment and the State. The former is already doing efficient work in the 
way of dredging, but much more needs to be done. There are a number 
of deep basins having from 27 to 49 feet of water, and even more in 
places, that are separated by shallow “hogbacks” on which from 9 to 18 
feet of water is found. The expense of dredging these will not be 
great, but private parties, after having deepened the water at their 
wharves, can not undertake the work. This port (Eureka) has now a 
business worth $15,000,000 annually, and while in time its character 
may be changed, the amount will continue to increase. The commerce 
of Humboldt Bay is principally with coast points, lumber constituting 
the greater portion of it, but there is a growing trade with the Hawaiian 
Islands, the Central American States, South America, England, and 
Australia. The products other than lumber are constantly increasing- 
in volume and value as well. The amount needed to properly prepare 
this bav to care for the largest vessels afloat need not necessarilv be 

%/ C J t/ 

large, but there must be an expenditure in order to secure the greatest 
facilities for shipping. 


12 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


The port of Eureka is the most important one on the Pacific Coast 
between San Francisco and Seattle. Humboldt Bay has an area of 
about 23% square miles, and is the most important center of the 
lumber industry in the State of California. It is also the most impor¬ 
tant shipping point for dairy products on the Pacific Coast, these for 
the past year having exceeded $1,500,000 in value. 

For the purpose of making the entrance to the bay safe to all vessels 
the Federal Government has constructed twin jetties into the ocean 
at an expenditure of over $2,000,000. By reason of the sandy ground 
upon which they rest, and the effect of heavy storms, these jetties have 
been considerably damaged and the entrance to the bay has also shoaled. 
Shortly after the completion of the jetties there was a uniform depth 
of 30 feet at the entrance, and all vessels entered with perfect safety. 
The channel at the entrance has shifted considerably, so that deep draft 
vessels must now enter from the northward instead of going straight 
in from the sea. As the ocean is often rough, a few laden vessels have 
been injured by striking the bar in passing out and in. It is, therefore, 
important that the Federal Government should make additional appro¬ 
priations for the purpose of repairing and extending the present 
jetties. Congressman F. W. Englebright has persistently urged upon 
Congress the necessity of this work, and has reason to believe that the 
necessary steps will be taken to complete it within the near future. 

At the present time the only commercial connection between Eureka 
and the outside world is by vessel through Humboldt Bay. There 
remains a gap of about 100 miles on the Northwestern Pacific Railroad 
to be completed along the Eel River to connect Eureka by railroad with 
San Francisco and the outside world. At the present time Eureka has 
a population of about 15,000 people. It has one of the most equable 
climates on the Pacific Coast, and its business men are as enterprising 
as any to be found in the State of California. It is now, and will 
continue to be, one of the most important ports on the California coast, 
and its interests should be zealously guarded. 

Practically all the tide lands in front of the city of Eureka were sold 
by the city at less than one dollar per front foot to private individuals 
under act of the legislature of 1857. It is doubted whether under the 
act of congress admitting California into the Union the State could 
legally authorize the issuance of such deeds. If void when issued the 
litle to these tide lands is still in the State. 














































-. 








V,.'. > r v.v^ ; . 


*' 

V 


^ v \A 6' ^ o v 


A 


o'" 



la-> - 


*« L 










REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


13 


SAN PEDRO. 

With an outer harbor of 700 acres inside the breakwater, 300 acres 
having an average depth of 40 feet, 400 acres having an average of 
30 feet, and 3,000 front feet owned by the city in the inner harbor 
having an average depth of 24 feet, there are at the present time no 
facilities for deep ocean going vessels at San Pedro. The Federal 
Government is doing effective work in dredging the channel in the 
inner harbor, and all difficulties in securing deep water may soon be 
overcome. In addition to the 3,000 feet of frontage owned by the city, 
most of which has been leased to private parties, San Pedro owns over 
20,000 feet, which includes the outer harbor frontage, on which no 
franchise has been granted. On the west side of the harbor the city 
owns 214 acres of submerged lands with a frontage of about 8,000 feet 
on the outer harbor, which can in time be utilized after having been 
filled in. While the city has leased much of its water front, it has 
reserved in one place a strip 1,480 feet long and 200 feet deep for dock 
and warehouse purposes. 

There are nine docks, with an aggregate length of 15,000 feet, owned 
and operated by private parties. While sixty vessels can work at one 
time at the docks, the dockage of the inner harbor is barely sufficient 
for the present business. In the outer harbor there are no docks as 
yet, although they can be constructed in from 30 to 40 feet of water. 
As conditions now exist, the larger vessels must anchor in the outer 
harbor and discharge by lighter a portion of their cargoes before they 
can enter the inner harbor. This constitutes a great drawback to the 
commercial possibilities and needs of San Pedro as a port. The Federal 
Government has expended $3,000,000 on the breakwater, and in addi¬ 
tion over $1,000,000 for dredging in the inner harbor. The business 
men of San Pedro feel that the most needed improvement at the present 
time is the construction of docks in the outer harbor at an estimated 
cost of $2,500,000. 

The 1,217 steamers and 385 sail vessels entering this port during the 
year 1907 brought in trade from all the coast ports and also a con¬ 
siderable amount from foreign ports. San Pedro is an important port 
for the shipment of oil, 491,323 barrels having been sent out during 
1907 to coast points and foreign ports. Being a distributing point for 
Los Angeles and a number of lesser cities, the receipts of lumber 
have been large, there being recorded 466,405,000 feet of lumber and 
178,844,000 shingles, with great quantities of other building material 
of wood for the year 1907. The foreign receipts and shipments aggre¬ 
gate a considerable amount and are constantly growing factors in the 
shipping business of San Pedro. 


14 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


Your committee held two sessions to consider the needs of San Pedro 
harbor. That city was visited by the committee early in 1908, when 
a meeting was held and the needs of the harbor discussed. At that time 
public sentiment had not -crystallized, and there was a great difference 
of opinion as to whether there should be a State Harbor Commission 
and improvements made at the expense of the State, or the city retain 
control. A second meeting was held at the Chamber of Commerce in 
the city of Los Angeles on Monday, the 16th day of November of this 
year, at which the city of San Pedro was represented by Senator Savage 
and members of the Chamber of Commerce. Wilmington was repre¬ 
sented by its city attorney, and Los Angeles by the Los Angeles Harbor 
Commission and members of the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce. 

Senator Savage contended for a State Harbor Commission, and the 
control of San Pedro Bay by such commission. The members of the 
Los Angeles Harbor Commission, as well as the Chamber of Commerce, 
representatives from Wilmington and one or two representatives from 
San Pedro opposed State control, and contended that the State should 
not interfere with conditions at San Pedro. Some time since the City 
Council of Los Angeles by ordinance created a harbor commission of 
three members. This commission, in conjunction with the Chamber of 
Commerce, has been working to bring about a consolidated city govern¬ 
ment under the borough system, which shall include San Pedro, 
Wilmington, and other beach cities. It is their purpose, then, to have 
the city vote bonds to the extent of several million dollars, and build 
municipal docks and wharves at San Pedro. 

While the record title to a greater portion of the water front at San 
Pedro is vested in private corporations, suit was filed in the month of 
October of this year for the purpose of testing the validity of these 
titles. All the private ownerships are based upon titles obtained between 
March 5, 1880, and January 16, 1891, under the general law of 1868, 
as amended in 1870, for the sale of swamp and overflow, salt marsh 
and tide lands. The State legislature has never passed any special act 
for the disposing of any part of the inner portion of San Pedro Bay, 
but under the interpretation of the swamp and overflow law State 
patents were issued to about seven eighths of the tide lands of the bay. 
It is now claimed that under the act of Congress admitting California 
to the Union, providing that all navigable waters shall be forever free, 
and the constitutional provision that all tide lands within two miles of 
any incorporated city or town of this State and fronting on the waters 
of any harbor or bay used for the purpose of navigation shall be with¬ 
held from grant or sale to private persons, partnerships or corporations, 
these State patents are illegal. As much of these tide lands has been 
occupied by private individuals claiming ownership for a great many 


OAKLAND WATER-FRONT 







8CAL E. OF 




FEET. 

3000 




rS 


































































































































REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 15 

years, it is contended that the statute of limitation would bar the State 
from recovering the same, even though the State patents might have 
been illegally issued. In the case of People vs. Kirber, decided by our 
Supreme Court within the year, it is decided that tide lands are held 
in trust by the State for the people, and that in such cases the statute 
of limitation does not run against the State. The contest over these 
tide lands will be bitter, and contested by both sides with determination. 
It may be several years before they end. Your committee, therefore, 
is of the opinion that in view of the unsettled conditions of the tide 
lands at San Pedro, and the wish of a large number of people in Los 
Angeles and adjacent cities that the improvement of that harbor should 
be left to the municipality, it would be unwise to recommend the 
appointment of a State Harbor Commission, or the submission to the 
people of a bond issue for the improvement of this port. 


OAKLAND. 

Oakland has eighteen piers and docks, none of which are owned by 
the State, and which are under the jurisdiction of the city, which has 
expended much money in the way of improvements. In order to remedy 
the disadvantages of crowded docks and shallow water the city has in 
contemplation the issue of improvement bonds to carry on the work that 
is estimated will cost at least $25,000,000 when completed. 

The business done at Oakland is given for three years, being from 
January 1, 1905, to December 31, 1907. During this period 4,513 
vessels entered the port, having a total of 2,019,918 tonnage. The 
greatest obstacle to an increase of business is shallow water, which must 
be deepened, no matter what the cost may be. This is essential in order 
to maintain the commerce in deeper bottoms. Oakland has about four 
miles of berth space, which takes in all the frontage on piers and 
wharves. New docks are needed, those now in use being inadequate 
even under present conditions. The dockage charges are regulated by 
city ordinances, and are practically the same as those that have been 
fixed by the State at San Francisco. As five railroads, including the 
belt line, are doing business on the Oakland wharves, demands for more 
room will constantly be made, and will necessitate the expenditure of 
a greater amount of money than is contemplated in the $5,000,000 bond 
issue now under consideration. All new work should be of-that perma¬ 
nent character that will last for all time. 



16 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


MONTEREY BAY. 

Monterey Bay is situated south of San Francisco Bay, and was one 
of the earliest shipping points in the State of California. The great 
necessity for that port 1 is a breakwater, and earnest effort has been 
made to secure the building of the same by the Federal Government. 
It is claimed that if the breakwater were constructed in Monterey 
harbor fourteen million acres of farming land held by residents along 
Monterey Bay contiguous to that port would be enhanced in value, and 
that much land now vacant would be made available for farming and 
grazing. Speaking of Monterey Bay Captain Davis, of the United 
States lighthouse service, wrote: 

For twenty-five years I have been running in and out of the port of Monterey. 
There is no harbor on the coast where finer anchorage can be found. Monterey is 
the best harbor between San Francisco and San Diego. It is thoroughly protected 
from southwest winds, which can not be said of any other harbor on the coast. 

The great obstacles to shipping in Monterey Bay are the ground- 
swells and undertow. The ground-swells sometimes sweep into the 
bay causing surging to a degree dangerous to the larger vessels, while 
smaller craft are seldom disturbed. The several attempts made by the 
people of Monterey to induce Congress to appropriate funds for the 
building of a breakwater have been ineffectual, as the engineering board 
has always reported adversely, giving as reasons that the shipping 
is not sufficient to justify the expenditure. Monterey has, however, 
become an important California port, as the tonnage which passed out 
of the harbor in the last year amounted to over 500,000 tons. It is 
true that this was largely shipments of oil, but oil is now an important 
factor in our commerce. The present tonnage represents an increase 
of over 200 per cent in the two years last past. 

It is estimated that the breakwater necessary to divert the current 
.and cut off the undertow should be built out into the bay in an easterly 
direction about 2,000 feet, and that it would cost approximately 
$1,000,000. This, it is claimed, will enhance the value of several million 
acres of land and assure better freight rates to a large population 
inhabiting the territory contiguous to Monterey Bay. 

The entire water front in Monterey is owned by the municipality, 
and the city is determined that it. shall always be free from monopoly 
holdings. It is to be hoped that the Federal Government can be induced 
at an early date to provide the necessary funds for the building of 
the Monterey breakwater. 


TABLE SHOWING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS AT THE VARIOUS HARBORS OF CALIFORNIA, THE IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED, AND A SUMMARY OF THE BUSINESS DONE, 


HARBOR. 

Depth in 
Harbor. 

Depth at Pier 
or 

Head Line. 
(Mean low 
depth.) 

Piers Owned 
by State. 

Piers Owned 
by 

Individuals. 

Average Length 
of 

Wharves. 

Cost of Piers 
or 

Wharves. 

Improvements 

Needed. 

Annual Cost 
Maintaining 
Wharves. 

Capacity 
Docks' 
for Vessels. 

Tide Lands 
Owned 
by State or 
Individuals. 

Vessels 

Entering 

Port 

1907. 

Foreign 

or 

Coast. 

What Should State Do? 

Improvements, 
How to be 
Made? 

Tonnage 

Received. 

Tonnage 

Shipped. 

San Francisco.. _ _ 

9i fathoms. 

23 to 33 feet. 

31, and 6,629 
feet of bulk¬ 
head. 

2 

18,600 feet and 
6,628 feet sea¬ 
wall. 

50 cts. to $2.90 
per square 
foot. 

Seawall 

extended. 

$170,000 

180 to 200 

By State and 
individuals. 

7,748 

From all 
parts of 
the world. 

Authorize issuance of 
bonds for improve¬ 
ments to anticipate 
needs of commerce 
by completing sea¬ 
wall and to build 
wharves. 

By issue of 75-year 
bonds. 

3,506,395 (Average 
for 5 years.) 

4,358,648 

San Diego . 

30 to 50 feet. 

25 to 30 feet. 

None. 

9 

13,620 feet. 

$611,000 

State wharf and 
sea wal 1 or 
bulkhead. 

$11,700 

24 

State. 

503 

Coast and 
foreign. 

Build seawall or bulk¬ 
head, and wharves. 

By issue of 75-year 
bonds. 

73,057 and 64,688,700 
feet lumber. This 
does not include 
coal and cement. 

10,976 

Eureka . -- -- _ 

15 to 49 feet. 

15 to 26 feet. 

Not given. 

Not given. 

Not given. 

Not given. 

Dredging necks 
of sand be¬ 
tween basins 
of deep water. 

Not given. 

Not given. 

Individuals. 

1,014 

Coast and 
foreign. 

Dredge in shallow 
places in harbor. 

Direct appropria¬ 
tion. 

75,000, besides oil 
and other prod¬ 
ucts. 

255,052,622 feet lum¬ 
ber; 14,589 tons 
other products. 

San Pedro_ - 

22 to 24 feet. 

24 feet. 

None. 

9 

15,020 feet. 

$40 per run¬ 
ning foot. 

Docking facili¬ 
ties. 

$50,000 

60 

Titles in dis¬ 
pute. 

1,602 

Coast and 
foreign. 
Principally 
coast. 

State aid not required. 

By municipality. 

Imports and exports. 

Merchandise, 29,912 tons; 466,405,000 feet 
lumber; 519,655 barrels oil; 1,638,325 
feet oak logs. 

San Luis Obispo — . 

30 feet. 

26 feet. 

One, county. 

1 

6,000 feet. 

$80,000 

Breakwater. 

$5,000 

8 

Individuals. 

Not given. 

Coast and 
foreign. 

State aid not required. 


5,000 

3,000,000 barrels oil; 
3,500 tons cereals. 

Santa Barbara .. - - - - . 

7 to 10 
fathoms. 

4 to 6 fathoms. 

None. 

1 

2,300 feet. 

$125,000 

Repairs only. 

$7,500 

6 

Individuals. 

375 

Coast. 

State aid not required. 


9,000 

4,000 

Newport _ - - - . — - - 

8 to 12 feet. 

8 to 12 feet. 

None. 

18 

(exceptingone 
these are all 
pleasure 
piers.) 

50 to 100 feet 
each. 

Not given. 

Jetties and 
dredging. 

$3,000 

2 

(at outer 
wharf.) 

State and in¬ 
dividuals. 

Not given. 

Coast. 

Jetties by Federal Gov¬ 
ernment and dredg¬ 
ing by the State. 

By Federal Gov¬ 
ernment. 

Not given. 

Not given. 

Oakland--- 

6 to 25 feet, 
average 20 feet. 

Great varia¬ 
tion, 0 to 25 
feet. 

None. 

15 

4 miles berth 
space. 

$50,000 and 
$1,000,000 for 
dredging by 
city. 

Other owners 
$5,000,000 for 
dredging. 

City bonds to be 
issued for im¬ 
provements. 

Not known. 

50 

and upward. 

State to little 
beyond old 
city limits. 

4,513 

(three years.] 

Coast and 
foreign. 

State aid not required. 

By municipality. 

2,019,918 
(three years.) 

Not given. 



















































































































Q 












O * 










y" 

. 

< 

v 






















REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


17 


PORT SAN LUIS. 

Port San Luis has achieved commercial importance largely because 
of the immense shipments of oil, there having been 3,000,000 barrels of 
this product exported during the year 1907. There is a depth of 34 
feet at the entrance, and an anchorage area of ten square miles with an 
average depth of 30 feet. The county, at an expense of $90,000, raised 
by bond issue, has constructed two wharves and owns one of the two 
docks at Port San Luis, the other being the property of private parties. 
The tide lands are all owned by individuals. The Federal Government 
has taken the preliminary steps toward completing a breakwater which 
has been under construction several years. The facilities for shipping 
are adequate for all present demands, and possibly for years to come. 

SANTA BARBARA. 

Santa Barbara was visited, but that city had nothing to ask, being 
in a very large measure a coast shipping point and pleasure resort. 
Although there have been moderate amounts of shipments in and out, 
this being a regular port of call for the Pacific coast steamers plying 
between San Francisco and San Diego, the one pier into the roadstead 
is sufficient for all the needs of the city. 

NEWPORT BEACH. 

Newport Bay, once a shipping point, is at the present time wholly a 
pleasure resort. The people living at that point justly believe the 
Federal Government should follow up the preliminary expenses of a 
survey made several years ago, and build twin jetties which would give 
them a safe and deeper channel into the bay, and a reasonable chance 
to gain back the lost trade. At the present time the bay is more an 
inland sea than a bay because of the little depth at the bar which renders 
navigation almost impossible. It is there believed that the State can 
influence the Federal Government to afford the necessary relief, which 
can come-only in the way mentioned—the construction of twin jetties 
and a reasonable amount of dredging. 

PETALUMA AND SAN RAFAEL. 

These two ports are on ’the tide waters of San Francisco Bay, and 
enjoy a rapidly growing commerce. Several thousand dollars have been 
expended by the town of San Rafael in dredging a channel from the 
bay to the city giving a depth of four feet at low tide. It is estimated 


2— JCH 


18 


s REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


that $5,000 appropriated by the State would increase the capacity of 
the channel so as to give competing water rates with the railroad. 

Petaluma is the port for a great section of country bordering on 
the north shore of San Francisco Bay. Several vessels arrive and 
depart daily, carrying great quantities of grain, dairy products, and 
general merchandise. An appropriation is needed to straighten the 
channel in the river above the head of navigation and to dredge the 
bar where the river empties into San Francisco Bay. It is estimated 
that $15,000 will suffice for this work. 

NECESSITY OF HARBOR IMPROVEMENTS. 

California is at present, as it were, merely a transfer station where 
freight is received and forwarded to Asia, Australia, Pacific island 
ports and the more eastern of the United States. It is true the oil fields 
have been instrumental in the development of a commerce with the Far 
East, and the fruit and other productions of the State have made their 
own market in all the states of the Union, and our lumber is in demand 
in many foreign countries, but we have not kept pace with other por¬ 
tions of the world in a manufacturing way. We have increased ship¬ 
ments into the State at the expense of our export trade, making but 
comparatively little use of the raw material that should greatly increase 
our commerce. 

On the California coast are extensive deposits of iron ore, and in 
time great smelters will be established and our manufacturing interests 
will be multiplied many fold. In addition to this raw material Cali¬ 
fornia has a power that is but partially utilized, which should be 
sufficient to operate all manufacturing, lighting, and power plants that 
may be required within this State during the next twenty-five years. 
All this can the water in the mountains do if properly harnessed, and 
not a drop be wasted that might be required for irrigation and domestic 
purposes. The impounding dams of San Diego County, the great 
Owens River project now im progress at the expense of the people of 
Los Angeles, the rivers and streams in the central and northern portions 
of the State, represent as much energy as all the coal mined in Penn¬ 
sylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, and Arkansas, if the theories 
of those who have thought much on this matter be true, and its cost is 
a mere trifle in comparison. 

Careful estimates made by the Federal engineers, made after years 
of study and the measurements of all the streams in the State, demon¬ 
strate that the possibilities of water power'development in California 
far exceed that of any other state in the Union. This is due to the fact 
that the streams of California, having their source in the Sierras, have 
greater fall in their course to the sea than the streams in other sections 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 19 

of the United. States. At the present time there is approximately 
200,000 horsepower of this great possibility fully developed. 

The topography of California is such as to divide the State into six 
drainage districts, as follows: San Francisco Bay drainage, 64,000 
square miles; North Pacific Ocean drainage, 20,040 square miles; Cen¬ 
tral Pacific Ocean drainage, 11,250 square miles; South Pacific Ocean 
drainage, 11,490 square miles; great interior basin drainage, 32,630 
square miles; Colorado River drainage, 18,950 square miles. The 
possible horsepower, conservatively estimated after careful measure¬ 
ment of all the streams, is as follows: 



Minimum 

Minimum 

Horsepower 

Additional 


Horsepower 

in Six High 

Horsepower 

Stream Drainage. 

in Year. 

Water Months. 

from Storage. 

San Francisco Bay drainage. 

. 2,655,000 

5,433,200 

1,501,400 

North Pacific drainage. 

. 566,730 

1,033,320 

15,740 

Central Pacific drainage. 

. 880 

14,390 

South Pacific drainage. 

. 30,810 

60,030 

71,350 

Interior drainage . 

. 240,680 

347,790 

206,870 

Totals . 

. 3,492,700 

7,901,080 

1,794,010 


Develop the iron deposits, harness the water with dams, flumes and 
turbines, and thousands of dynamos will create energy enough to cause 
the employment of tens of thousands of skilled workmen in all the 
seaport cities and their neighboring towns, and at our docks will be 
found vessels bearing the flags of all the maritime nations seeking as 
freight the manufactured products of California. All this is sure to 
come, and that, too, not more than a generation hence. Much money 
has been expended in the harbors of the State, not for future business, 
but for present demands only. The reports made to this committee all 
declare that “there is dockage enough for the present business,” while 
at the same time these reports urge the necessity of improvements to 
meet the demands in sight for needed additional facilities for shipping. 

When the time comes, and it will come right soon, that the people of 
this State will do as has been done in Italy and other nations, utilize 
all the existing water power and thus secure constant and cheap fuel, 
the “green coal” of the mountains, every landowner in California, no 
matter how remote from the seaboard, will derive especial and lasting 
benefits, accruing from the manufactories that will be built on the 
shores of every bay that can be improved sufficiently. to shelter the 
vessels, large and small, that are sure to seek this coast from all parts 
of the world. The Tehuantepec Railway, shortening the route for 
freight between Atlantic and European ports and the great Pacific field 
of trade, give promise of what the business on this coast must become 
when the Panama Canal shall have been completed and vessels, steam 
and sail, of all sizes can come from the Atlantic Ocean into the ports of 












20 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


San Diego, San Pedro, San Francisco, and Humboldt, as well as the 
several lesser ports that will claim and secure their share of business 
because they will all produce the manufactured products that the world 
must have at any cost. 

This may not seem pertinent to the report of your joint committee on 
harbors, but the connection between a proper improvement of the 
harbors of the State and the increased commerce, which must come with 
increased manufacturing activity, is so close that we deem it advisable 
to call in a brief way attention to the importance of a partially unused 
force that can be utilized to the advantage of all. The State is not 
developing the water power, nor will it be called upon to do so. The 
State, however, will derive benefits from the liberal expenditures in this 
direction now being made by municipalities and corporations, which 
will be increased ten fold when there is a general awakening to the 
importance of this subject. The proper improvements made in harbor 
facilities will have much to' do with hastening the dav when California 
factories will be operated by the water from the mountains. 


CALIFORNIA’S PRINCIPAL HARBOR—ITS PRESENT 

AND ITS FUTURE. 

The improvements in the bay of San Francisco prove the wisdom 
shown by the State in the expenditure of apparently large sums of 
money for the construction of seawalls and wharves. The State, owning 
the wharves, can and does fix the charges which, while less than at some 
ports, cover the cost of administration, repairs, and some new work, and 
at the same time provide a sinking fund for the redemption of the 
bonds issued, together with the annual interest paid thereon. During 
the past year, which was a period of comparative depression, the present 
wharf facilities in San Francisco have apparently been ample. But 
periods of depression do not stay the life of wharves that were erected 
in the past without having in view longevity, and which must soon be 
replaced by modernized structures. There must also be additional 
docks and wharves, not only to provide for the increased tonnage that 
is inevitable, but also to accommodate the larger vessels that are year 
by year growing in size. To provide room for these new wharves there 
must be extension of the seawall and the reclamation of land for com¬ 
mercial purposes. 

That it is wisdom for the State to expend money on such improvements 
admits of no question. Or rather, it should be stated in another way, 
it is wisdom for the State to loan its credit for such improvements as 
will not only care for present demands, but also meet all the require¬ 
ments of the commercial world in the years to come. 



WATER 


SHOWING 


DESIGNED FOR THE 

FEDERATED HARBOR IMPR0VEMENTASS0CIA31QN' 


lUTH£ft WAGOA/ER 


WHHEUER 


Pink tint represents property owned by State of California. 
Olive Green tint represents property recommended to be 























































































































__ y f' 

. :*> 

■ • ^ 

* A}-* )ii 4U, 

*\ A 

/e. 

" \% 

X*, 4 

\ \ . 

< A 















REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


21 


There are two harbors to which the State can consistently loan its 
credit, having power to adjust the schedule of charges and to provide 
for the repayment of all moneys obtained on the credit of the State. 
These are San Francisco and San Diego. In the first named the State 
owns all the wharves except two, and the additional ones now necessary 
can be built only as property of the State, subject to its regulations. 
In San Diego the State does not own any of the wharves, but with the 
erection of a seawall there will not only be the wharves to the pier line, 
but there will be the reclamation of tide lands worth nearlv the cost of 
construction; and immediately following the building of the seawall 
and wharves at San Diego the State charges will naturally be the basis 
for the regulation of all dockage charges, and eventually cause all 
wharves now owned by private parties and corporations to practically 
come under State supervision. 

L Great as has been the expenditure at San Francisco, that harbor has 
I been self-sustaining. With the improvements so badly needed, costing 
probably $10,000,000, there will come increased revenues with the 
increased commerce, while there will be but little increase in admin¬ 
istrative expenses. At the present time wharfage facilities are taxed 
to their utmost to care for the 9,678,792 tons of freight annually 
handled. The increase since the earlier days has been constant, and it 
requires no imagination to prove that within a few years this port will 
be handling 13,000,000 tons of freight annually. To meet this increased 
business, and to accommodate the additional shipping there is the 
s necessity of providing greater facilities than now exist, and v r hich can 
not be provided for in time from the annual revenues of the port. The 
report of Luther Wagoner and Wm. Heuer, U. S. A., the engineers of 
the Federated Harbor Improvement Association, says: 

The commerce of the port is growing, not with regularity, but with constant 
acceleration, and in twenty years the commerce should amount to 13,000,000 tons 
(annually). What increase of this acceleration will follow the completion of the 
Panama Canal is suggested, but not figured in the calculation. It is predicted that 
the proper extension of the docks and wharves would enable the port to do a com¬ 
merce of 30.000,000 tons annually. This would mean the covering the ten miles of 
water front with docks. 

There are five plans for extension presented, as follows: 

A. Development of the water front continued along the bay in a southerly 
direction beyond what is now the boundary line between San Francisco and San 
Mateo counties. 

B. In case a Greater San Francisco were formed, embracing other cities on San 
Francisco Bay, construction of other wharves on the Oakland side of the bay. 

C. Cut down Yerba Buena Island and build up an adjacent shoal. 

I). Acquire land now submerged and in private ownership between India Basin 
and what is known as Islais Creek channel, which would permit of an inner basin 
being formed, in which nine additional wharves may be constructed, to furnish 

more than four miles additional berth room. 

E. Slips and solid piers may be constructed between Fort Mason and Presidio. 

This will furnish 19,200 lineal feet of berth room. 


22 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE. ON HARBORS. 


Obtain permission of the Secretary of War to reestablish the bulkhead or seawall 
line 150 feet bayward of its present location, and for a corresponding alteration of 
the pierhead line, especially at Mission Rock, to furnish 5.3 miles of additional wharf 
room, or 10.8 miles additional berth room between Channel street and Hunter's 
Point, or, including that in Paragraph D, more than 15 miles additional berth room. 

The engineers’ report referred to shows that with one fourth of the 
cost of the Liverpool harbor San Francisco’s harbor could be extended 
to accommodate twice the business of Liverpool. It is further shown 
that under the recent amendment to the constitution, authorizing 
75-year bonds, the cost of extension and improvement of the harbor 
would not in the least be burdensome, as the percentage of earnings 
would provide for maintenance, repair, and management, and leave 
ample for interest and sinking fund for redemption of the bonds. The 
engineers make a detailed statement showing the cost of the harbor 
complete. The estimated cost is for the erection of docks, wharves, 
and appliances sufficient to accommodate a traffic of 30,000,000 tons 
annually. The total cost, not considering the price of real estate, would 
amount to $43,284,195. It is estimated that the value of the present 
water front improvements now amounts to $10,000,000, and this added 
to the proposed development would make the entire cost $53,284,195. 
Continuing, the engineers say: 

“It is proposed to pay for these improvements with long term (75-year) bonds, 
a synopsis of the commerce of the port showing that the sum could easily be paid 
from the port itself. The Federated Harbor Improvement Association suggests that 
$10,000,000 long term bonds be issued for the work that is to be completed by 1920. 
These bonds would not all be issued before 1920. As before shown, the revenues of 
the port are ample to pay all harbor expenses, pay the interest, and eventually 
redeem the bonds.” 

The only too frequent congestion of freight notwithstanding the 
efforts of the Harbor Commissioners and their assistants, aided by the 
business men of San Francisco fully warrant the conclusions as to 
present conditions and requirements for the future, as set forth in the 
report of the Federated Harbor Improvement Association: 

The present wharves are inadequate for an increased commerce. 

New wharves and additional seawall should be constructed in advance of the 
immediate requirements of commerce. 

Harbor lines should be modified as soon as practicable. Applications to change 
these lines and to build several solid piers extending outside the pierhead lines should 
be made to the Secretary of War. 

Funds from existing dock revenues are not sufficient to make the improvements 
as rapidly as required. The present port charges should not be increased. The 
improvements to be made in the next ten years will cost between $10,000,000 and 
$11,000,000. Funds for this purpose may he obtained by an issue of $10,000,000 
four per cent 75-year State bonds, sinking fund for their redemption to begin 
twenty-five years after their first issue. 

Warehouses at the head of wharves are essential. A change in the bulkhead line, 
in accordance with recommendations, would afford suitable warehouse sites. 

Notably the most important seaport on the western coast of the 
United States, San Francisco, lias for its territory, in a commercial way, 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


23 


all the land to the Atlantic Ocean. Hence it is that the great trans¬ 
continental lines are doing their utmost to reach that point, as well as 
the more southerly ports, for all the year the way is open to traffic on 
land as well as on the ocean. Taking into consideration the increase 
in population in the Western States during the past twenty years, and 
the work now being done by the Federal Government in the reclamation 
of desert lands, there will unquestionably be within the next twenty 
years millions of people where there are now hundreds of thousands. 
This means added production and almost numberless new manufactur¬ 
ing establishments throughout the West and the State of California, a 
largely increased commerce that will tax to the utmost the capacity 
of all the ports in California, and especially that of San Francisco. 
There will come a time when American ships will be made possible, and 
under the American flag will be carried the breadstuffs and manufac¬ 
tured articles demanded by the civilized and enlightened nations of the 
world. California will be the first to reap the reward of the extended 
commerce, for she lias the things that the people of the world need and 
must have. To prepare for that time the ports must be made ready. 


NECESSITY FOR STATE ACTION. 

We found at San Diego a condition as to the water front largely in 
favor of the State. The building of a seawall will not only make it 
possible for the State to construct and own a number of wharves, but 
there will follow the reclamation of lands that will at once be worth 
almost the cost of constructing the seawall, and will be a source of 
revenue for all time to come. The Federal Government is making 
improvements in San Diego Bay that will not only necessitate the 
expenditure of .much money in the way of deepening the channel in 
places, but will require a preparation for harboring the battle fleet of 
the Pacific when occasion requires. Not as great in area as San 
Francisco Bay, San Diego Bay is large enough and deep enough for the 
entire Pacific fleet, and not in any way interfere with commerce. 
Another thing that will eventually cause the business of this port to 
largely increase is the shorter distance to the Hawaiian Islands, Japan, 
Cffina, and Australia. It will be the first port of call for vessels coming 
through the Panama Canal, and having two transcontinental railioad 
lines never disturbed by the rigors of winter or the flooding of melted 
snows, commerce from the middle western, eastern, and some of the 
southern states will naturally seek the Pacific at this point. 

If present conditions alone were to be considered, San Francisco and 
San Diego bays would still be without wharves of any kind, for in the 
past “present” there was no need for innovations of that kind. In 



24 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


the light of the future San Diego, a most important port, having all 
the requirements of a safe harbor, with practically no limit to its 
capacity, and the State being in possession of its rights as to tide lands, 
there must be substantial improvements in the way of a seawall and 
wharves. California can not afford to neglect this important point, 
nor can the business done be passed over to private individuals and 
corporations. No reflection is cast upon private persons, for the business 
of San Diego harbor has been well and honestly done, to the encourage¬ 
ment of commerce. The Harbor Commissioners have at all times been 

earnest and faithful in their duties, but honesty and faithfulness do 

«/ 

not build seawalls and wharves. 

The Board of State Harbor Commissioners for the bay of San Diego 
recommends the building of a seawall and wharves by the State as the 
best way to secure low wharf charges, as well as making provision for 
future increased business from the ocean trade. The method of build¬ 
ing and paying for the same as. applied to San Francisco would apply 
to San Diego as well. The State would be merely loaning its credit, 
the bonds and interest to be paid from the business of the harbor. 

CALIFORNIA HARBORS AND LATIN REPUBLICS. 

While it is not within the province of tliis committee to suggest 
methods and means of extending trade, or the building up of a great 
commerce for State ports, yet the connection between improved harbors 
and an increased commerce is so close that your committee deems it 
proper to make reference to the possibilities of closer trade relations 
with the twelve Latin republics having frontage on the Pacific, and 
which are spending immense sums of money in the improvement of their 
ports. Mr. John Barrett, of Oregon, Director of the Bureau of Ameri¬ 
can Kepublies, who has not only made a most exhaustive study of the 
resources of the republics south of the United States, but who has as 
well made personal examination of their trade relations, gives some 
valuable information. He calls attention to the wonderful development 
in all the Latin republics, in which business enterprises have been 
inaugurated that involve the expenditure of many millions of dollars. 
He asserts that if one twentieth of the expenditures that have been 
made for trade relations in Japan and China had been devoted to 
establishing closer relations with the Latin republics the results would 
have been incomparable. In illustration Mr. Barrett shows that the 
Argentine Republic, with 6,000,000 population, had a greater foreign 
trade than Japan with its 50,000,000 and China with its 400,000,000 
population. And yet the United States has made but little effort to 
secure a fair proportion of this immense trade. That which we have 
neglected has been eagerly sought by England and Germany 





25 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 

An expenditure of $15,000,000 has been ordered by Chili for the 
improvement of the harbor at Valparaiso, and other ports are receiving 
practical attention. Heretofore, the development of Mexico has been 
largely limited to the more eastern and central parts of that republic, 
but of late years the officials of Mexico have been giving attention to 
the western or Pacific portion, having brought to completion improve¬ 
ments and enterprises that have already been of vast benefit to Cali¬ 
fornia ports and to the State at large as well, besides inaugurating 
others that California should be prepared to utilize. 

One of the first steps toward an enlargement of trade and an increase 
of manufacturing and commercial interests is the proper improvement 
of the harbors of the State, even before the shipping fleet of the United 
States can be increased to proper proportions, as it will be. The atten¬ 
tion of the commercial bodies of the State should be called to an almost 
neglected field, which promises far greater results than does the Orient. 
While the latter is being cultivated there is no excuse for apathy in 
the extension of trade relations with the Latin republics, which are so 
rapidly developing their natural resources. The proper improvement 
of the State’s harbors will have much to do with the establishment of 
closer trade relations with republics which should be brought into a 
great commercial union, the United States being the leading member, 
and California the most important factor. 

Your committee recommends to the legislature the advisability of 
State aid in securing for our commercial interests full information as 
to the natural resources of all the Latin republics, especially those 
bordering on the Pacific, as well as their needs for the manufactured 
products and commercial articles originating in this State, which should 
find a market in those southern countries now almost monopolized by 
Germany and Great Britain. It is true such information would be of 
general use, but California is in position to reap the greater reward 
owing to its almost unlimited supply of raw materials, its unlimited 
power for manufacturing purposes, and its harbors that, with proper 
improvement, can not be excelled. 

ADVISORY BOARD OF HARBOR COMMISSIONERS. 

Your committee recommends an amendment to the Political Code pro¬ 
viding for an Advisory Board of Harbor Commissioners, to be comprised 
of the presidents of the several boards of harbor commissioners in this 
State. The desirability of such a board should be apparent. It might 
be well to add to such advisory board the Governor and the Controller, 
in view of the proposed increase in the expenditure of State monec^s and 
in order to protect the people’s interests. This is a matter to which 
serious consideration should be given, your committee having, during its 
researches, realized the advisability and the necessity foi such a board. 



26 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


CONCLUSIONS. 

At the present time the accommodation for ocean freighters is in its 
infancy as compared with Atlantic ports, although the total number 
of vessels discharging cargoes during 1907 in California ports was 
15,775. It has been said that facilities are sufficient for the present 
tonnage entering our ports, but increase of population within the State, 
a like increase in the states farther east, and the extension of trade 
territory will soon place present conveniences among the things of the 
past. To permit port facilities to remain at a standstill will be to 
acknowledge that all that has been said regarding the great anticipated 
growth of commerce is false, and we do not believe with our money 
that which we say with our mouths. 

The State owns the tide lands at San Diego, and a portion of the tide 
lands at San Francisco, where the building of seawalls gives the State 
the ownership of wharf and warehouse privileges on its own reclaimed 
lands, a valuable acquisition that is worth millions of dollars in present 
values. Naturally concessions and rentals will add more millions of 
dollars, and eventually return to the State all that may have been 
expended, with interest, and still keep port charges at a minimum. 
Increased facilities will work to the advantage of consumer and shipper 
alike, while the benefits to the entire State will be inestimable. 

For commercial purposes there are in State ports thirty-one wharves 
owned by the State, two owned by county, and thirty-eight owned by 
corporations and individuals. Added to these may be counted some 
thirty piers and docks occasionally used for commercial purposes, but 
which are in the main designed for pleasure or merely for private 
interests. Of those privately owned two are in San Francisco, nine 
in San Diego, nine in San Pedro, one in Santa Barbara, fifteen in 
Oakland, one at Port San Luis, one at Monterey, and one at Newport. 
The aggregate length of all the piers, State and private, has been esti¬ 
mated at 81,900 feet, affording accommodation for about 350 vessels 
at one time, a small number for the growing business being developed 
at all the ports. The cost of these wharves or piers is impossible of 
determination, varying so greatly with conditions. In San Francisco 
the cost varies from 50 cents to $2.90 a square foot, the character of 

piling and bottom being taken into consideration. At San Pedro the 

0 

cost has been placed at $40 a running foot. In San Diego Bay there 
has been found the same conditions that prevail in San Francisco Bay 
as a whole, although the cost of concrete piling may be a little less. 
There is a demand for improvements by the State, confined principally 
to the building of seawalls, the construction of piers, and dredging. 
The approximate of aggregate ultimate cost is not less than $50,000,000. 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


27 


The maintenance and repairs of all the ports aggregate for 1907 only 
$247,200, showing economical management, and this when the commerce 
in these ports represented in value hundreds of millions of dollars. 
This cost of maintenance, of course, is the aggregate of only those 
ports making report. 

How shall these improvements, if decided upon, he made? Your 
committee has asked this question of many people, and the answer has 
invariably, with one exception, been, “By the issuance of long term 
bonds bearing a low rate of interest.” The reason is obvious. As the 
benefits to be derived from these improvements will extend to future 
generations it is desirable that the expense of making the improvements 
should be partially borne by those who receive a portion of the benefits. 
This is generally understood by the people of the State of California, 
inasmuch as the legislature at its last session submitted to the electors 
of the State a constitutional amendment which provides for the issuance 
of 75-year bonds, and their redemption by a sinking fund which shall 
not begin for a period of eighteen years after their issuance. This 
amendment was carried by a large vote, and it was generally understood 
by the electors that these bonds were intended for the improvement of 
the harbor of the State. The legislature will, therefore, only be carry¬ 
ing out the will of the people in submitting to the electors of this State 
the bond issues recommended for the ports of San Francisco and 
San Diego. 


RECOMMENDATIONS. 

From the investigations made, as set forth in the foregoing report, the 
Joint Legislative Committee recommend as follows: 

San Francisco .—That there be submitted to the electors of the State 
of California, under constitutional amendment adopted at the 1908 
election authorizing 75-year bonds, a bond issue of three million dollars 
for the purpose of building a seawall and appurtenances for the port of 
San Francisco; a bond issue of six million five hundred thousand dollars 
for the purpose of building wharves and docks at the port of San 
Francisco; a bond issue of fifty thousand dollars for the purpose of 
extending, repairing, and improving the belt line railroad at the port of 
San Francisco; a bond issue of one million dollars for the acquisition 
of land at or near Islais Creek Basin; and a bond issue of foui hundred 
thousand dollars for dredging in the port of San Francisco. 

We further recommend that provision be made for the sale of these 
bonds, when authorized, by the State Treasurer upon direction of the 
Governor of the State of California, after a resolution requesting such 
sale shall have been made and adopted by the State Harbor Commis- 


28 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


sioners. Such bonds to be sold only as the funds are needed for the 
specified improvements. 

San Diego .—We recommend for the port of San Diego a bond issue 
of one million dollars for the purpose of building a seawall and its 
appurtenances, and a bond issue of five hundred thousand dollars for 
the purpose of building wharves and docks at said port, under the same 
terms and conditions as contained in the recommendation for the bond 
issue for the port of San Francisco. 

Humboldt Bay .—We recommend that a direct appropriation of 
twenty-five thousand dollars be made for the purpose of removing by 
dredging the hogbacks or sand deposits which are at the present time a 
destruction to shipping in Humboldt Bay. 

Oakland .—As a majority of the people of Oakland prefer municipal 
control of harbor improvements at that point and advocate an issue of 
municipal bonds to pay for the same, we recommend that the State 
take no action so far as the improvement of the water front at Oakland 
is concerned. 

San Pedro .—Inasmuch as the title to the tide lands at San Pedro 
is in litigation, and as the people of Los Angeles, and a portion of the 
inhabitants of San Pedro and Wilmington desire municipal control of 
that port, the committee recommends that the building of walls and 
docks at San Pedro be left entirely to the municipality. 

Petaluma and San Rafael .—We recommend that a direct appropria¬ 
tion of fifteen thousand dollars be made for the purpose of dredging 

t 

the channel and also dredging across the bar at Petaluma, and that the 
sum of five thousand dollars be appropriated for dredging the channel 
to the city at San Rafael. 

LEROY A. WRIGHT, 

E. I. WOLFE, * 

T. J. KENNEDY, 
WALTER LEEDS, 
PERCY JOHNSON, 
LOUIS STROHL, 

Joint Committee on Harbors. 


REPORTS 


OF THE 

PRINCIPAL HARBORS ON THE CALIFORNIA COAST 


FOR THE YEAR 1907 


Prepared for the Joint Legislative Committee Appointed 
Under Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 3. 


1908. 














.. 








REPORT 

OF THE 

BOARD Of STATE HARBOR COMMISSIONERS 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA. 


San Francisco, Cal., March 2, 1908. 

Answers to questions proposed by the Joint Committee appointed at 
the last session of the Legislature regarding harbors in the State of 
California, Senator Leroy A. Wright, Chairman: 

1. What is the depth of water over the bar at the entrance to harbor? 

The average depth is five and one half (5%) fathoms, and there is a commodious 
channel having a minimum depth of nine (9) fathoms. 

2. What is the average depth of channel in the harbor, and what is the area of 
anchorage ground? 

The average depth of the channel is nine and one half (O 1 /^) fathoms. The area 
of anchorage ground in the immediate vicinity of the city, and now used as such, 
is twenty-four (24) square miles, exclusive of fairways, which occupy seven (7) 
square miles, in addition to this, there is available for anchorage in San Francisco 
Bay forty-eight (48) square miles, and in the adjoining extension of this inland 
sea, known as San Pablo Bay, twenty-one (21) square miles; a total anchorage 
ground of exactly one hundred (100) square miles. 

3. What is the average depth inside the bay at piers and docks, or where piers 
and docks may be constructed? 

The average depth inside the bay at piers and docks is twenty-three (23) feet; 
although at some places the depth is thirty-three (33) feet, which will allow the 
largest ships being safely docked. 

4. How many piers and docks in your harbor are owned and operated by the State? 

All of the piers and docks in the port of San Francisco are owned and operated 
by the State with the exception of two, viz. : the docking facilities of the Union 
Iron Works and those of the Western Sugar Refining Company. 

5. How many piers and docks owned by the State are leased to private persons 
or corporations? 

The Pacific Mail Steamship Company have a fifteen-year lease on piers 42 and 44, 
commonly known as the Pacific Mail docks. This lease was executed and became 
effective February 2, 1907, and $371,673 rental was paid in advance The piers 
are each 650 feet long and 140 feet wide. 

The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company have a lease for a period 
of 168 months, executed and effective March 14, 1907, on what is commonly known 
as China Basin wharf, for which they paid in advance the sum of $24,930 rental. 
This wharf is 720 feet long and 60 feet wide. 

The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company have a lease for a period 
of 72 months, commencing November 23, 1904, on what is commonly termed the 
Fourth Street Car Ferry Slip, located at the intersection of the water front line 





32 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


and the northerly line of the China Basin property, also leased to the said com¬ 
pany. The sum of $30,000 rental was paid in advance. 

The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company have a lease for a period 
of 96 months, effective February 17, 1904, on the addition to what is known as the 
Little Main Street Wharf, for which they paid in advance the sum of $19,897 rental. 

The Loop Lumber Company are, to have a fifteen (15) year lease on dockage 
facilities on Central Basin, which will become effective upon the completion and 
acceptance of the wharves which are now under construction. They have paid in 
advance for this privilege the sum of $44,760 rental. 

6. How many piers and docks are owned and operated by private individuals or 
corporations? 

The Union Iron Works and the Western Sugar Refining Company own their own 
docks and piers. 

7. What is the cost of each of such docks and piers, and what revenue do they 
produce to the State? 

The dockage facilities used by the Union Iron Works are not operated for commer¬ 
cial purposes, and therefore produce no revenue to the State. They are used 
solely for the building and launching of vessels, and their cost is unknown. 

The Western Sugar Refining Company use the docks and piers, which were built 
by them, as an adjunct to their business, viz.: the importation and refinement of 
sugar. They produce no revenue to the State and their cost is unknown. 

By the extension of the seawall, as is proposed, both of these docking facilities 
will come under the jurisdiction of the State, and will then be subject to tolls and 
wharfage rates, the same as other State docks. 

8. What is the total number of piers and docks in your bay, how are they con¬ 
structed, and what are their estimated lives? 

The docking facilities of the harbor consist of thirty-one (31) projecting piers, 
in addition to which there is 6,629 lineal feet of bulkhead wharf. 

The older piers, of which there are nineteen (19), are constructed of preserved 
piles with wooden caps, joists, and floorings; twelve (12) of more modern con¬ 
struction rest on huge concrete cylinders, eight (S) of which have wooden caps, 
joists, and flooring, and four (4) of which have heavy steel caps over the cylinders. 

The estimated lives of the piers built on preserved piling and having wooden 
superstructures is from seven (7) to eight (8) years, after the expiration of which 
time extensive repairs are necessary. The life of a pier built on concrete cylinders 
is indeterminable and of indefinite length, some having been put in over thirteen (13) 
years ago are still standing and are apparently as good as ever as regards foundation. 

9. What is the aggregate length of the piers and docks now in use? 

The aggregate length of the piers and docks now in use is 18,600 feet, exclusive 
of the 6,629 feet of bulkhead wharf above mentioned. 

10. What has been the cost of construction of your piers and docks? 

Owing to the diversified forms of construction employed in the erection of docks 
and piers it has been deemed best to classify the answer to this question according 
to the mode of construction used, as follows: 

A dock constructed of unpreserved or green piles will cost approximately fifty 
($0.50) cents per square foot. 

If constructed on preserved piling the cost will be about eighty ($0.80) cents 
per square foot. 

If constructed on cylinder piers with wooden caps, joists, and flooring the cost 
will be about one and ($1.25) 25-100 dollars per square foot. 

If constructed on cylinder piers with steel caps and wooden joists and flooring the 
cost will be between one and ($1.60) 60-100 dollars and two and ($2.20) 20-100 
dollars per square foot. 

An amount of approximately thirty ($0.30) cents per square foot should be added 
to the above prices if the pier is to be covered with a wooden shed. 

A dock constructed on cylinder piers with steel caps and having a reinforced 
concrete flooring and an iron fireproof shed, will cost approximately two and 
($2.90) 90-100 dollars per square foot. 


REPORT OP JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


33 


It is to bo understood, of course, that the prices given above are subject to varia¬ 
tion, accoiding to the demands of labor and the cost of material. 

11. What is the present condition of your docks and piers? 

The docks and piers constructed on concrete cylinder piers, that is, on piles 
protected by concrete piers, are in good condition; those on preserved piles are in 
every condition from good to that of being on the verge of collapse. 

12. Are your dock facilities adequate for all demands of the trade at any season 
of the year? 

The dockage facilities of this port are inadequate in so far as they do not permit of 
specific assignment of wharves to regular lines of steamers, which is deemed desirable. 

13. What pier improvements are needed in your harbor? 

The seawall must be extended from the Union Depot Ferry House to Pier 42, a 
distance of 5,100 feet. One thousand feet of this wall extending northerly from 
p ier 42 is now nearing completion. Abutting this wall there will be built three of 
the most modern type of concrete fireproof piers. This work should be followed by 
the reconstruction of at least twelve of the old piers and the addition of four new 
ones, all extending to the pierhead line. This work will cost ultimately $5,000,000, 
and will acquire in seawall lots alone property worth at least $2,000,000. The 
pierhead line should be redrawn to include the whole of China Basin, followed by 
twelve or more piers to serve the Potrero and Mission sections. 

All of the old piers north of the ferry house must be modernized as dilapidation 
demands at a cost of over $2,000,000. A solid wall pier should be built to the 
pierhead line from the neighborhood of the foot of Taylor street to protect modern 
docks required between Lombard and Taylor streets. The seawall should be 
extended westerly from Taylor and East streets to the Government reservation at 
Black Point, thus acquiring valuable seawall lots and pier sites demanded by com¬ 
mercial extension along North Beach. 

Ultimately Central Basin must be enclosed by the seawall, with a drawbridge as 
provided in the law, and thence extend to the intersection of Islais Creek. 

14. What would be the approximate cost of such needed improvements? 

The work above outlined, if done in permanent manner, will cost approximately 

$ 20 , 000 , 000 . 

15. What improvements, if any, are expected to be made by the Federal Govern¬ 
ment; state character and probable cost of same? 

The Federal Government will probably cause the removal of two small rocks near 
Mission Rock. 

16. What steps, if any, has the Federal Government taken towards making such 
improvements? 

The Federal Government has made surveys and estimates of this work, but the 
results are not obtainable. 

17. What is private enterprise doing toward developing the shipping facilities of 
your port, and building up its commerce? 

Private enterprise is doing nothing toward developing shipping or commerce, 
except the Western Pacific Railway Company, who contemplate the construction of 
terminal facilities along Islais Creek. To date there has been approximately 14,000 
yards of material placed for a mole. The aforesaid company own approximately 
$6,000,000 worth of property in this section of the city, and contemplate its develop¬ 
ment for an Oriental terminal. Ultimately this will mean the expenditure of an 
enormous sum of money, and as a natural consequence the shipping of the port will 
receive an impetus. 

18. What has been the annual cost of maintenance of your docks and piers? 

The average annual cost of maintenance for the docks and piers in San Francisco 
Bay for the last twenty-five years has been approximately $170,000 per year. This 
amount does not include dredging. 

19. If wood and piling have been used in the construction of piers and docks, what 
is the average life of the piling? 

Piers and docks constructed on preserved piles last seven (7) or eight (8) years. 
On green piles from three (3) to six (6) years. 

3 —JCH 


34 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


20. What are your dockage charges? 

The port charges in San Francisco are extremely moderate and bear favorable 
comparison with those of any port in the world. 

The following dockage charges are quoted from “Harbor Rules, Regulations, and. 
Rates, adopted by the Board of State Harbor Commissioners, San Francisco, 1906,” 
and to which reference is hereby made: 

KATES OF DOCKAGE. 

Each rate is for a day of twenty-four (24) hours, or any part thereof, including 
Sundays, holidays, and rainy days. 

61. For all ocean vessels, steam or sail, and all sail vessels, steamboats, and 
barges navigating the bay of San Francisco and the rivers and other waters flowing 
into it, of two hundred net registered tons or under, 2 cents per ton ; for all such 
vessels of over two hundred net registered tons, $4 for the first two hundred tons, 
and three quarters of a cent for each additional ton. 

Full rates shall be charged as follows: 

62. (1) Vessels with cargo on board docking at wharf while discharging cargo. 

(2) Vessels with cargo on board docking at wharf while discharging or taking on 
passengers and baggage. 

(3) Vessels with no cargo on board docking at wharf while discharging passengers 
and baggage. 

(4) Vessels with cargo on board docking at wharf while taking on stores, supplies, 
or fuel oil for fuel for such vessel. 

(5) Vessels with cargo on board docking at wharf while lying idle. 

(6) Vessels that are engaged in towing. 

(7) Vessels that are not engaged in carrying freight and passengers. 

Half rates shall be charged as follows: 

G3. (1) Vessels with no cargo on board docking at a wharf while loading cargo. 

(2) Vessels with no cargo on board docking at a wharf while receiving passengers 
or receiving stores, supplies, or fuel oil for fuel of such vessel. 

(3) Vessels with cargo on board docking at a wharf while taking on a reasonable 
amount of cargo, exclusive of stores, supplies, or fuel oil for fuel for such vessel. 

(4) Vessels with no cargo on board while lying idle at a wharf. 

(5) Vessels while receiving or discharging ballast or receiving stiffening. 

(6) Vessels either discharging, loading, or lying idle while occupying outside 
berths. 

(7) Vessels while moored in docks, slips, basins, or canals. 

(8) Vessels engaged in towing and vessels not engaged in carrying freight and 
passengers not entitled to half rates. 

G4. When the per diem dockage of a vessel, ns above described, is not a multiple 
of five, it must be reduced or increased, as the case may be, to the nearest such 
multiple; provided, that if it be equally near to two such multiples, it must be 
increased to the first such multiple above. 

G5. All bills for dockage must be paid when due, whether approved by the master 
or not. Failure to pay said bills on presentation will subject the vessels to be 
placed on the delinquent list, and to the penalties provided by law. Errors, if any, 
will be rectified by the Board. 

66. When a vessel of any kind is charged or has paid dockage at a wharf for 
any day, she may use the same or any other wharf during that day without further 
charge, no matter how often she may leave and return; provided, a receipt for 
payment or transfer card from the Wharfinger at the first wharf be produced; and 
on application of the master the Wharfinger is required to issue such transfer card. 

RATES OF DOCKAGE ON LIGHTERS. 

GGrt. A lighter is understood to be a vessel which lias neither power nor steering 
equipment. 




REPORT OP JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


35 


(57. A dockage rate of 1 cent per ton net tonnage per day will be charged on all 
lighters in the following cases : 

(1) When discharging or loading at a wharf. 

( — ) ^ hen discharging into or loading from a vessel lying at a wharf or in a 
slip with or without cargo on board. 

(3) When transporting from a wharf to a vessel, or from a vessel to a wharf, 
but one dockage charge will be made per day. 

21. What is the cost of handling freight per ton? 

For an answer to this question, the following is quoted from the “Harbor Rules, 
Regulations,” etc., above mentioned : 

RATES OF TOLLS. 

Both a discharging and a loading toll shall be imposed on all merchandise (includ¬ 
ing vessels’ stores and supplies and fuel oil for such vessel) except where otherwise 
specified, and must be paid by the vessel discharging or loading same. 

68. A ton is by weight 2,000 pounds, unless otherwise specified; by measurement, 
40 cubic feet. 

69. Merchandise, for the purpose of tolls or wharfage, must be computed by 
weight or measurement, as the one mode or the other will give the greater number 
of tons. 

70. Of the following articles 2,240 pounds constitute a ton : coal, railroad iron, 
pig iron, gypsum, asphaltum, ores, crude or boiled sulphur, paving stones, sand, and 
ballast. 

TOLLS PER TON. 

71. On merchandise (except where otherwise specified) including vessels’ stores 
and supplies and coal and fuel oil for such vessel, per ton, 5 cents. 

On flour, grain, and millstuffs, 5 cents. 

On 400 pounds or less, 1 cent. 

On 800 pounds or less and more than 400 pounds, 2 cents. 

On 1,200 pounds or less and more than 800 pounds, 3 cents. 

On 1,600 pounds or less and more than 1,200 pounds, 4 cents. 

On 2,000 pounds or less and more than 1,600 pounds, 5 cents. 

Tolls on merchandise when measured or charged a higher rate, to be collected 
according to the foregoing subdivisions. 

TOLLS CHARGED OTHERWISE THAN BY THE TON. 

72. On the following articles tolls must be paid as follows : 

On fir, redwood, spruce, and all softwood lumber, per 1.000 feet, board measure, 
10 cents. 

On oak, hickory, ash, and all hardwood lumber, per 1,000 feet, board measure, 
20 cents! 

On lumber or timber discharged in the water in any slip, dock, basin, or canal, 
the same as if discharged on a wharf. 

On piles discharged on any slip, dock, basin, or canal, per pile, 6 cents. 

On fence posts, per 100, 10 cents. 

On railroad ties, per 1,000 feet of lumber, board measure, contained therein (32 
or 24 feet to a tie, according to size), 10 cents. 

On shingles, per 40 bundles, 10 cents. 

On laths, per 60 bundles, 10 cents. 

On shakes, per 100 bundles, 10 cents. 

On empty barrels (merchandise), each, *4 cent. 

On empty sugar barrels, each, % cent. 

On cord wood, per cord, 5 cents. 

On tan bark and stave bolts, per cord, 5 cents. 

On fire bricks, per 1,000, 15 cents. 


36 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


On bricks (other than fire bricks) discharged on, or loaded from any wharf, per 
1,000, 10 cents. 

On bricks (other than fire bricks) discharged from any vessel lying at any wharf, 
or in any slip, dock, or basin, into another vessel, or received into any such vessel, 
per 1,000, 5 cents. 

On wool or cotton in sacks, per sack. 1 cent. 

On wool or cotton in bales, strapped, per bale, 1% cents. 

On hops in bale, per bale, 1 cent. 

On hides of cattle (green or dry), per hide, % cent. 

On skins, per skin, 1-16 cent. 

On cattle, horses, and mules, per head, 5 cents. 

On colts and calves, under a year old, per head, 2)/•> cents. 

On sheep and hogs, per head, 1 cent. 

On hay, per ton, 5 cents. 

On crushed rock (long ton). 5 cents. 

On reapers, mowers, horse rakes, hay presses, gang plows, cultivators, and wheeled 
vehicles, set up, each, 10 cents. 

On headers and separators, set up, each, 20 cents. 

On charcoal, per 35 sacks (of 55 pounds each), 5 cents. 

On cement, 5 barrels to the ton. 5 cents. 

On lime, 8 barrels to the ton, 5 cents. 

On beef, pork, or fish, 6 barrels to the ton, 5 cents. 

On sugar or syrup, 6 barrels to the ton, 5 cents. 

On wine or liquor, per barrel. 1*4 cents. 

On wine or liquor, per pipe, 5 cents. 

On cocoanuts, per 1,000, unhusked, 15 cents. 

On cocoanuts, per 1,000, husked, 10 cents. 

On bananas, per bunch, 14 cent. 

On salmon, per ton of 2,000 pounds, 5 cents. 

Crude oil (whether in barrels or bulk), per ton of 2,000 pounds (7% pounds to 
gallon), 5 cents. 

Crude oil, naphtha, gasoline, etc., conveyed either inward or outward, over or 
through any wharf, bulkhead, or other State structure, or loaded or discharged in 
any slip, basin, or channel, per ton of 2,000 pounds (7 % pounds to gallon), 5 cents. 

73. (The weight of crude oil contained in tanks or vessels or conveyed to or 
from shipping, to be computed on the basis of 7% pounds per gallon, if actuaT 
weight is not obtainable.) 

74. On empty packages, being returned to the owner, who uses them to send 
commodities to market, no tolls will be charged. 

75. Grain, flour, millstuffs, beans, and seeds will be subject at all wharves to the 
same rules and rates of tolls and wharfage as are imposed on other merchandise. 

Amendment to Rule 75: Grain, flour, millstuffs, beans, and seeds may remain on 
the wharves at Sections No. 1 and No. 2 of the seawall until 5 o’clock r. m. on the 
third day after discharge, free of wharfage charge; for the next five days, or any 
part thereof, there shall be a wharfage charge of 5 cents per ton ; for each additional 
day thereafter the wharfage charge shall be 5 cents per ton ; provided , that where 
any owner or consignee fails or refuses to pay, on demand, bills rendered for wharf¬ 
age, or refuses to comply with other rules and regulations of the Board of State 
Harbor Commissioners, the provisions of Rule 82 shall apply and become imme¬ 
diately effective as to such owner or consignee. 

76. The term “grain” is intended to and does include wheat, barley, oats, corn, 
and rye; the term “flour” includes only the flour of wheat, and “millstuffs” includes 
only bran, middlings, shorts, and ground feed. 

78. No tolls will be charged on donkey engines or stevedores' tools when taken 
on the wharf for the purpose of loading or discharging a vessel; nor on milk, 
butcher, baker, ice, or laundry supplies furnished daily to vessels. 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


37 


79. Merchandise landed on a wharf and not removed therefrom, may be reshipped 
from the same wharf without payment of further toll, but the wharfage, if any due 
thereon, must be paid. 

50. Merchandise, except bricks (other than fire bricks), discharged from a vessel 
lying at any wharf or within any slip, into lighters or other vessels, is subject to 
the same rates of tolls as if discharged on or loaded from a wharf. 

51. When the tolls have been paid on merchandise, on its being discharged 
from a vessel it may be landed thence on a wharf, or discharged into another vessel, 
without the payment of further tolls; except bricks (other than fire bricks), which 
shall be charged as follows : On bricks, 5 cents per one thousand. 

In addition to the above specified tolls a charge for stevedoring should be added 
amounting to between thirty ($0.30) cents and forty-five ($0.45) cents per ton. 

22. What warehouse charges are made on the piers and docks? 

Reference is again made to “Harbor Rules, Regulations,” etc., from which the 
following is quoted : 

WHARFAGE. 

52. Merchandise must be removed from- the wharf before 5 o’clock p. m. on the 
day following the one on which it was placed thereon ; but wharfingers are hereby 
authorized, when the owners or consignees of merchandise desire it, and it can be 
done without interfering with the business of the wharf, to allow merchandise to 
remain on the wharf after the prescribed time, at a wharfage charge equal to an 
additional toll for every forty-eight hours or part thereof. If merchandise be not 
removed within twenty-four hours after notice by the wharfinger, it shall be liable 
to the penalties of Section 2524 of the Political Code. 

Exception to Rule 82: Lumber discharged from vessels carrying 500,000 feet, board 
measure, or over, and from vessels of no lesser capacity, may remain on wharf until 
5 o’clock p. M. of the third day following its discharge. Then and thereafter all 
provisions of Rule 82 shall be effective and must be enforced. This exception to 
Rule 82 to become effective July 31, 1907, and to continue in force until further 
notice. 

23. What are the demurrage charges for the first twenty-four hours? 

This question is answered by Rule 82 above quoted. 

24. How many vessels can secure dockage facilities at one time? 

This question is not entirely clear, the answer depending entirely upon the ton¬ 
nage of the vessels. Certain piers in this port will accommodate four large ships, 
while the same pier will accommodate several steam schooners. It is estimated, 
however, that from one hundred and eighty to two hundred vessels can secure berth 
room. 

25. Are dockage facilities ample, or nearly so, for the present demands? 

Owing to present national financial conditions, and local shipping labor conditions, 
the dockage facilities of this port are at the present time ample for needs of trade. 
The demands of commerce made on this port, however, are so excessive that to 
comply with them would take years of time and millions of money. By constant 
rearrangement of berth space, the facilities of this port are now accommodating the 
commerce. This answer should not, however, be taken as a criterion of future 
development of trade. 

26. Are your tide lands owned by the State or private individuals? 

The State owns no tide lands in San Francisco Bay whatever, except the land 
acquired by the construction of the seawall, commonly termed seawall lots. The 
tide lands of the bay were sold by the State under the Tide Lands Act. 

27. If portions of your tide lands are owned by individuaTsrglve the area as nearly 
as possible of private ownership and its location? 

The approximate area of private ownership of tide lands is four (4) square 
miles, and extends along the entire water front to the Presidio. 

28. What are the dockage and shipping charges proposed by owners of private 
docks and piers? 



38 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


No dockage or shipping charges are proposed by owners of private docks and piers, 
as the facilities under private ownership are used solely in connection with the 
business of the owners. 

29. From what ports is freight received, foreign and domestic? 

From all ports in the United States and the world. 

30. What is the amount of freight in tonnage shipped to domestic and foreign 
ports? Give aggregate in each case. 

During the year ending June 30, 1907, there was shipped from San Francisco to 
foreign ports 1,013,872 tons of freight. During the same period there was shipped 
to domestic ports 2,744.776 tons. 

31. What is the amount of tonnage annually received? 

The average tonnage for the past five years has been 3,506,395 tons per year. 

32. What is the amount of tonnage annually shipped? 

The average tonnage shipped for the past five years has been 3,476,395 tons per 
year. 

33. How many steam vessels entered your port during the year 1907? Give tonnage. 

During the year ending December 31, 1907, there were docked at the port of 
San Francisco 6,900 steam vessels, with a total tonnage of 3,S95,454. Of this 
number 2,937 were bay and river craft, and the balance, or 3,963, were deep sea¬ 
going vessels. This does not include the ferry boats which ply between the city of 
San Francisco and transbay points, which make 170 trips daily and carry 100,000 
passengers. 

34. How many sail vessels with tonnage entered your port during the same period? 

For the calendar year ending December 31, 1907, there were docked at the port 
of San Francisco 748 sail vessels, with a total tonnage of 720,149. Of this number 
729 were deep seagoing vessels and 19 bay and river craft of over ninety tons 
registered measurement. 

35. What are your leading imports? 

The leading imports of the port of San Francisco are cereal products, coal, iron, 
lumber, cement, gravel, shingles, shakes, laths, bricks, glass, hemp, sugar, cotton, 
tobacco, pelts, whale oil, petroleum and products, tropical fruits, hardwoods, nitre, 
and all other general merchandise. 

36. What are your leading exports? 

Manufactured products of all kinds, flour, hay, malt liquors, wines, canned goods, 
canned and dried fruits, fresh and citrus fruits, etc. 

37. Where private parties own the water front land, can the title be secured by 
the State at reasonable prices without condemnation? 

It is not necessary for the State to secure title to tide lands of private ownership, 
as the construction of the seawall creates the State’s own water front. 

38. What railroads have spurs to or on the piers and docks, and to what extent 
is there interference with the convenience of the public? 

The Southern Pacific Company have spurs on Piers 42 and 44. The Atchison, 
Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company have spurs on Piers 26 and 28. The 
public is interfered with only to the extent that traffic is sometimes delayed by 
switching cars across the street in front of these docks, 

39. What interior territory in this or adjoining states may be economically served 
by shipping to or from your port? 

All of the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys from Shasta on the north to 
Bakersfield on the south ; every navigable river in the State; and the entire state of 
Nevada. 

40. What are the immediate prospects of an increase of the shipping of your port? 

The immediate prospects are good, and a lively increase in shipping may be 
expected within the next month or two, and to continue indefinitely. 

41. What are your warehouse and railroad facilities for handling freight? 

The warehouse facilities have recently been augmented by the erection of a grain 
warehouse 1,000 feet long by SO feet wide. Exception to Rule 75, above quoted, 
applies to grain discharged at this point. As stated above, the sheds on the wharves 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


39 


are used for warehouse purposes for a stated period of time. (See answer to 
Question 2_, Rule S-.) . As an adjunct to the docks the State owns and operates 
■w hat is known as the belt railroad, with four miles of trackage, connected with 
which aie about two miles of private spurs in addition. This railroad receives car 
loads fiom transbay railroads and distributes them among the freight houses, ware¬ 
houses, and factories around the w r ater front. Over 50,000 loaded cars w r ere handled 
on the belt railroad during the past year. A uniform rate of $2.50 per loaded car 
is charged for this service. 

42. What are the prospects of an immediate enlargement of such facilities? 

The construction of the seawall contemplated will enlarge the shipping field, which 
will, of necessity, have to be served by the belt railroad, thus demanding an 
enlargement of this facility. 

43. What, if any, suggestions have you to make to existing laws rrgulating harbors? 

It is to be regretted that existing laws, wdiile holding the Harbor Commission 
responsible for any abuse of State property, does not give it sufficient control over 
the same for the abatement of nuisances. A striking illustration of this has recently 
been presented to the traveling public, wffien certain daily newspapers of this city 
set decency and good order at naught. 

The case in question has been reported upon by Commissioner W. E. Dennison, 
acting ,as a committee of one on abuses of privileges connected with the approaches 
to the ferry building. Mr. Dennison submitted the following report: 

“In recognition of the necessity of having free and unassailed passage through the 
union depot and ferry house of San Francisco, used daily by more than 100,000 
people, the Board of State Harbor Commissioners on November 21, 1007, estab¬ 
lished and marked lines defining a strip 12 feet wdde along the curb of the north 
and south wfings and all of the space about the main facade to a distance at least 
100 feet from the building. All vehicles standing for hire, except street cars, and 
all itinerant persons soliciting baggage or passengers, or selling or crying for sale 
wares or merchandise of every kind, including newspapers and racing programmes, 
wrnre ordered to remain beyond said lines. During inclement weather only w'ere 
the news vendors allowed the shelter of the building. 

“For a period of fifty-six days the public enjoyed a peace and freedom at the main 
gatewmy of this city that had never before been knowm. No resistance w r as made to 
the regulation until the afternoon of January 16, 190S, w r hen a mob of more than 
100 crossed the lines and defied the police. The regular newsboys w r ere reinforced 
and led by hoodlums from 16 to 22 years of age carrying papers. After unavailing 
efforts to keep back the offenders the police made a number of arrests in the most 
humane manner. 

“When the first of these offenders w T as brought to trial in the police court the 
State's attorney for the Board was curtly denied by the district attorney the cus¬ 
tomary privilege of appearing for that official in the interests of the State. There¬ 
fore, a presentation of the case from the standpoint of this Board w r as not permitted. 
The case was dismissed wfithout even as much as a reprimand, save for the Board 
of State Harbor Commissioners and its officers. 

“In the absence of a fixed penalty for this particular violation of a sound regula¬ 
tion, made solely in the interest of a long-suffering public, the police court and the 
district attorney’s deputy derided the efforts of the Board and through it the State 
of California.” 

The law^s should be amended so that a proper end would be accomplished, and in 
case of conflict with municipal authorities the matter should be adjusted in the 
State courts. 

Law T s should be made compelling the Pilot Commission to make its report to the 
Governor of the State or the State Legislature, and the pilot charges of the port 
should be materially reduced. As a remedy we would suggest that the pilots be 
placed on monthly salaries instead of fees, and a nominal charge, if any, be made 
against incoming and outgoing vessels. 

44. What, in your opinion, is it practical for the State to do to assist in the build¬ 
ing up of commerce at your port? 


40 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


Authorize the issuance of sufficient bonds to make the required improvements, 
moderately anticipating the wants of commerce. 

45. If improvements are made by the State, should they, in the judgment of your 
business men, be made by direct appropriation or by the issue of bonds bearing a low 
rate of interest and covering a period of many years? 

By the latter. 

46. What are your pilotage charges? 

The rates of pilotage into and out of the harbor of San Francisco are as follows 
(Section 2406, Political Code) : “All vessels under 500 tons $3 per foot draught: 
all vessels over 500 tons $3 per foot draught, and 3 cents per ton for each and 
every ton registered measurement. * * * In all cases where inward bound vessels 

are not spoken until inside of the bar the rates of pilotage herein provided shall be 
reduced 50 per cent. Vessels engaged in the whaling or fishing trades shall be 
exempt from all pilotage except where a pilot is actually employed.” 

The pilotage inside the heads to the anchorage opposite San Francisco and about 
the harbor, or between the harbor of San Francisco and the ports of Mare Island, 
Vallejo, and Benicia, must be at such rates as agreed upon between the parties, not 
to exceed $5 per foot draught. 

The legislature of 1903 amended the law reducing the rates of pilotage into and 
out of the harbor of San Francisco from $5 per foot draught to $3 per foot draught, 
and from 4 cents per ton registered measurement to 3 cents per ton. 

47. What obstacles, if any, have shipping interests to contend with in your port? 

The vessels docking at the port of San Francisco have to pay an extraordinarily 

high rate for the water they use. There is also an absence of warehouse facilities 
along the water front, which tends to increase merchandise cost. In addition to 
this there is a total lack of any facilities for handling bulk freight. A limited 
number of power cranes should be installed on the wharves. 

48. If, in your opinion, any of the fixed charges on shipping can be reduced, please 
make suggestions as to the best method of accomplishing such reduction. 

The shipping charges of the port are reasonable and bear favorable comparison 
with the shipping charges of any of the world's ports. There should be no reduction 
in such charges until such time as the improvements contemplated are completed. 

49. Have any private persons or corporations attempted to monopolize the shipping 
facilities of your port or your water frontage; if so, state what persons or corpora¬ 
tions, and what, if anything, has been done to prevent such monopoly? 

We have no knowledge of any such attempt either by private individuals or cor¬ 
porations ; in fact, it would not be possible under the law. 

Respectfully submitted. 

W. V. STAFFORD. 

President Board of State Harbor Commissioners. 


REPORT 


of t;he 

BOARD Of STATE HARBOR COMMISSIONERS 

SAN DIEGO, CAL. 


San Diego, Cal., March 2, 1908. 

1. What is the depth of water over the bar at the entrance to harbor? 

The channel on the bar is 250 feet wide and 28 feet deep. 

2. What is the average depth of channel in th$ harbor, and what is the area of 
anchorage ground? 

The channel in the harbor is from 30 to 50 feet deep. The available area of 
anchorage in the bay of San Diego, which I assume to be that part of the deep water 
within the 26-foot contour is, as near as can be determined from the small scale 
maps published by the Government, 9.2 square miles. 

3. What is the average depth inside the bay at piers and docks, or where piers 
and docks may be constructed? 

The depth at the pierhead line is rarely less than 25 feet, usually over 30 feet. 
All wharves should terminate at the pierhead line. 

4. How many piers and docks in your harbor are owned and operated by the State? 

The State has no wharves in the bay. 

5. How many piers and docks owned by the State are leased to private persons 
or corporations? 

The State owns no wharves in the bay, and therefore can lease none. 

6. How many piers and docks are owned and operated by private individuals or 
corporations? 

There are nine large wharves, all private ownership ; there are ten small wharves, 
foot wharves. The Federal Government has a small wharf at Fort Rosecrans and 
a quarantine wharf, with buildings, at La Playa. 

7. What is the cost of each of such docks and piers, and what revenue do they 
produce to the State? 

Cost. Rent per Year. 


Santa Fe wharf. 

$200,000 

00 

$360 

00 

Pacific Coast Steamship Company. 

50,000 

00 

600 

00 

Spreckels Bros.’ Commercial Co. 

150,000 

00 

360 

00 

San Diego Lumber Company. 

40,000 

00 

240 

00 

Russ Lumber and Mill Company. 

44,000 

00 

420 

00 

.Torres & Son . 

25,000 

00 

84 

00 

Standard Oil Company. 

2,500 

00 

240 

00 

Coronado Beach Company, ferry wharf. 

75.000 

00 

96 

00 

Coronado Beach Company, commercial wharf... 

25,000 

00 

72 

00 


8. What is the total number of piers and docks in your bay, how are they con¬ 
structed, and what are their estimated lives? 

There are nine large wharves in the bay. The piers or wharves constructed on 
the bay of San Diego are, without any exception, wooden structures supported on 
piling. The wharf known as the “Spreckels wharf” is really the only one that can 
be considered in good condition. The life of any timber structure upon this bay is 











42 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


limited to the activity of the teredo and limnora. As a general thing, no piling will 

last for a longer period than two years unless it be well protected with hydraulic 

cement concrete, or is a piling treated with creosotum, or some other preservative 
agent. Under the best of conditions no timber structure will last without a large 
amount of expenditure for maintenance. 

9. What is the aggregate length of the piers and docks now in use? 

1. The wharf of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company is 40 

feet wide at the shore end. It extends into the bay about 2.500 feet, on an easy 
curve. At the extreme end it is 74 feet wide. About 500 feet from the shore a 
spur extends westward SOO feet long. The deep water end of the shore is 72 feet wide. 

2. The wharf of the Pacific Coast Steamship Company extends into the waters 
of the bay 1,917 feet, and at the outer end has a head or T 115 feet wide and 415 
feet long. 

3. The wharf of the Spreckels Bros.’ Commercial Company extends into the 
waters of the bay 2.000 feet. It is 75 feet wide at the outer end. The Spreckels 
coal bunkers are on this wharf. 

4. The wharf of the San Diego Lumber Company extends into the waters of the 
bay 2,03S feet, and at the outer end has a head 75 feet wide by 250 feet long. 

5. The wharf of the Russ Lumber and Mill Company is 500 feet wide and 
extends into the waters of the bay 450 feet. 

6. The wharf of Torres & Son extends into the waters of the bay about 2.050 
feet. The head at the outer end is 500 feet long and SO feet wide. 

7. The wharf of the Standard Oil Company is located 2.090 feet out from the 
shore, and is 200 feet long and 10 feet wide. A pipe line extends from the shore 
to the wharf. 

S. The wharf of the Coronado Beach Company is located on the Coronado side 
of the bay; it contains the slip for the Coronado ferry. It is 350 feet wide and 
extends into the bay 300 feet. 

9. The commercial wharf of the Coronado Beach Company is located on the 
Coronado side of the bay. It is 100 feet wide and extends into the baj T 200 feet. 

AGGREGATE LENGTH OF WHARVES. 

Main Wharf. Spur or Head. 


Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company. 2,500 SOO 

Pacific Coast Steamship Company. 1,917 415 

Spreckels Bros.’ Commercial Co. 2,000 

San Diego Lumber Company. 2,038 250 

Russ Lumber and Mill Company. 450 

Benson—090 feet on tide lands; 300 feet below low tide. 

Jorres & Son. 2.050 500 

Standard Oil Company. 200 

Coronado Beach Company, ferry. 300 2,105 

Coronado Beach Company, commercial. 200 11,455 


10. What has been the cost of construction of your piers and docks? 

The answer is given in the answer to Question No. 7. 

11. What is the present condition of your docks and piers? 

The wharves are all in good condition for traffic, except the wharf owned by 
Jorres & Son, which is in very bad condition, and mostly fallen down. 

12. Are your dock facilities adequate for all demands of the trade at any season 
of the year? 

The present wharf facilities seem to be sufficient for all business demands at 
the present time. 

13. What pier improvements are needed in your harbor? 

The Commissioners think that a wharf owned by the State, which might be used 
by all persons and companies not having wharf facilities of their own in the bay, 
would greatly increase the value of this port in the minds of shippers and seafaring 
men as a shipping point. 











43 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 

•• 

14. What would be the approximate cost of such needed improvements? 

A new wharf for the State would cost approximately $100,000. 

15. What improvements, if any, are expected to be made by the Federal Govern¬ 
ment.; state character and probable cost of same? 

The Federal Government,is building a naval coaling station in the bay; the cost 
will probably be $250,000. A bill has been introduced in Congress this term appro¬ 
priating $259,750 to build a dry dock and for other work in the bay. 

16. What steps, if any, has the Federal Government taken towards making such 
improvements? 

The coaling station is now in course of construction. 

17. What is private enterprise doing toward developing the shipping facilities of 

your port, and building up its commerce? . 

No answer. 

18. What has been the annual cost of maintenance of your docks and piers? 

The wharves in San Diego Bay cost annually about $11,700. 

19. If wood and piling have been used in the construction of piers and docks, what 
is the average life of the piling? 

Piling properly treated with creosote and cement will last fifteen to twenty years. 
If piling is not properly treated it will not last longer than from three to five years. 
The limnora and teredo destroy the piles. 

20. What are your dockage charges? 

Per day, one cent per ton for 200 tons or less; three quarters of a cent per ton 
for balance; net register tonnage. 

21. What is the cost of handling freight per ton? 

Freight is unloaded from ship and loaded into cars. Merchandise, 50 cents per 
ton ; lumber, 75 cents per thousand feet; ties, GO cents per .thousand feet. 

22. What warehouse charges are made on the piers and docks? 

Warehouse charges on wharves depend on the commodities, time and other con¬ 
ditions, and are made by contract. 

23. What are the demurrage charges for the first twenty-four hours? 

There are no demurrage charges. Regular dockage is charged when a vessel lies 
alongside a wharf, whether she discharges or not. 1 

24. How many vessels can secure dockage facilities at one time? 

The full capacity of all the wharves, under favorable conditions, is twenty-four 
vessels at one time. 

25. Are dockage facilities ample, or nearly so, for the present demands? 

There is sufficient room at the wharves for all vessels that come into the bay 
at the present. 

26. Are your tide lands owned by the State or private individuals? 

The State owns nearly all the tide lands. 

27. If portions of your tide lands are owned by individuals, give the area as nearly 
as possible of private ownership and its location? 

The Coronado Beach Company owns tide lands on a portion of North Island. We 
have no data giving the area. 

28. What are the dockage and shipping charges proposed by owners of private 
docks and piers? 

No answer. 

29. From what ports is freight received, foreign and domestic? 

Imports from foreign countries are mostly from France, Germany, England, 
Ireland, Mexico, British Columbia, Chili, Japan, Hongkong. Imports from ports in 
the United States are mostly from New York and from Pacific coast ports. 

30. What is the amount of freight in tonnage shipped to domestic and foreign 
ports? Give aggregate in each case. 

No answer. 

31. What is the amount of tonnage annually received? 

During 1907, 73,057 tons ; G4,GS8,700 feet of lumber. 


44 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


32. What is the amount of tonnage annually shipped? 

1907, 10,976 tons. 

33. How many steam vessels entered your port during the year 1907? Give tonnage. 

Four hundred and twenty-three. 

34. How many sail vessels with tonnage entered your port during the same period? 

Eighty. Of the total tonnage of vessels entering, amounting to 12S,00S, 73,057 tons 
were left at this port. 

35. What are your leading imports? 

The principal articles of import are coal, coke, pig iron, cement, domestic animals, 
copper matte, hides, guano, bran, onyx, fire brick, lumber, flour, feed, structural 
iron, iron pipe, machinery, groceries, dry goods, and leather goods. 

36. What are your leading exports? 

Honey, tallow, hides, pelts, fish, wool, oranges, lemons, and grain. 

37. Where private parties own the water front land, can the title be secured by 
the State at reasonable prices without condemnation? 

So small a portion of the water front and tide lands is owned by private parties, 
and this at such favorable locations, that it is very unlikely they would be willing 
to sell to the State. 

38. What railroads have spurs to or on the piers and docks, and to what extent 
is there interference with the convenience of the public? 

The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company has tracks on its own 
wharf and on the Spreekels Bros.’ wharf; these tracks do not inconvenience the public. 

39. What interior territory in this or adjoining states may be economically served 
by shipping to or from your port? 

San Diego Bay is the natural and best port of entry for all the territory south 
of Tehaehapi and eastward of southern California, including Arizona, New Mexico, 
Utah, Colorado, and Kansas. 

40. What are the immediate prospects of an increase of the shipping of your port? 

The commerce of the port of San Diego is growing rapidly at present, owing to 
the rapid development of southern California. When the isthmian canal is opened 
we anticipate that very great amounts of the products of southern California will be 
shipped to the Atlantic coast through this port and the canal; and that great 
quantities of merchandise from the cities of the Atlantic coast and from Europe, 
which is destined for southern California and territory 'eastward, will be shipped 
through the isthmian canal and will be entered at this port; also that large quantities 
of the products of the Orient shipped to the United States will be entered at this port. 

41. What are your warehouse and railroad facilities for handling freight? 

There is at present only one transcontinental railroad reaching the shores of this 

bay, the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe. This company has a large warehouse and 
a large platform on its wharf. 

The Pacific Coast Steamship Company has a large warehouse on its wharf and 
one on the shore. 

The Spreekels Bros.’ Company has a large warehouse on the shore near its wharf. 

42. What are the prospects of an immediate enlargement of such facilities? 

We do not know that there will be an increase of warehouse facilities soon. We 
think there will be a large increase within two or three years, when the San Diego 
and Arizona railroad is built. 

43. What, if any, suggestions have you to make to existing laws regulating harbors? 

We have no suggestions to make at the present time as to the laws governing 
harbors. Any suggestions and recommendations which are the results of our 
experience and mature thought which we may wish to make will be presented in our 
next biennial report, in October, 190S. [This report was printed in December, 190S.1 

44. What, in your opinion, is it practical for the State to do to assist in the build¬ 
ing up of commerce at your port? 

We think that a wharf owned and controlled by the State, and the building of a 
portion of the bulkhead or seawall, will tend greatly to increase the business of this 
port. 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


45 


45. If improvements are made by the State, should they, in the judgment of your 
business men, be made by direct appropriation or by the issue of bonds bearing a low 
rate of interest and covering a period of many years? 

Phe business men of San Diego would prefer that bonds of long term and low 
rate of interest should be issued for improvements in the harbor, rather than that 
a direct appropriation should be made for the purpose. 

46. What are your pilotage charges? 

No answer. 

47. What obstacles, if any, have shipping interests to contend with in your port? 

Excepting cheap and ready transportation to the interior of the county, there are 
no great obstacles to shipping interests here. 

48. If, in your opinion, any of the fixed charges on shipping can be reduced, please 
make suggestions as to the best method of accomplishing such reduction. 

The building of a wharf by the State is probably the only practical and effective 
way to secure low rates of dockage, etc., for transient or other shipping not in 
possession of a wharf in this bay. 

49. Have any private persons or corporations attempted to monopolize the shipping 
facilities of your port or your water frontage; if so, state what persons or corpora¬ 
tions, and what, if anything, has been done to prevent such monopoly? 

The Santa Fe wharf, by reason of its location and form, covers 1,000 feet of water 

front. 

TIDE LANDS. 

In the Matter of Tide Lands of the Bay of San Diego, California, the Title to Which 

Is Disputed as Against the State. 

Witnesses who claim to have known portions of the shore line of the bay of San 
Diego during the past thirty years, have gone over the ground along what they claim 
is the original line of mean high tide (before fills were made on the tide lands) from 
South Twenty-first street to Atlantic street in the city of San Diego, California. A 
map has been made of that portion of the water front, showing the line claimed by 
these witnesses as the original line of mean high tide. This line is practically the 
same as the line laid down by Lockling in his map of Horton's Addition to San 
Diego, made in 1870, and filed in the office of the recorder of the county of San 
Diego, State of California, in June, 1871, by A. E. Horton. 

The Commissioners intend to have the testimony of these witnesses perpetuated 
by having the witnesses examined before a court commissioner. After this matter 
is concluded, the Commissioners think they may be able to proceed with confidence 
to enforce the claims of the State to these tide lands. 


HUMBOLDT BAY. 


The secretary of the Eureka Board of Harbor Commissioners made a statistical 
report for 1907, which was sent to the joint legislative committee in lieu of the 
detailed report asked for. It was evidently thought that a comprehensive review of 
the business done, aided by a personal inspection on the part of the committee of 
the facilities of the port, would enable its members to arrive at a wise conclusion 
in the making up of its report and the accompanying recommendations. 

The business done from this port was principally with coast points. There was 
in connection with this a valuable and constantly growing trade with the Hawaiian 
Islands, the Central American States, the South American ports, and with England 
and Australia. Naturally exports constituted the bulk of the business done by 
water. Eureka being the center of large manufacturing enterprises. The shipments 
of lumber (lumber proper, shingles and shakes reduced to lumber feet) were 
341,350,1S8 feet, valued at $6,025,412; to this valuation should be added $1,679,386 
for other forest products, making a total of $7,704,798. Were this all, Eureka 
might be considered an important port on the California coast, well up to the front 


46 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


of the list, but there is more in the way of exports. Adding the 14,5S9 tons of 
animal, dairy, farm and ranch, orchard, fish, game and miscellaneous products, valued 
at $2,022,991, there is a grand total of $9,727,7S9 in manufactures and products 
originating at this one port. 

The importations for the year 1907 amounted to $3,0S0,114, and the arriving and 
departing passengers numbered 32,617. 

Some estimate of the importance of the shipping business in Humboldt Bay may 
be obtained from the following figures of earnings, the true index of the carrying 


trade: 

Lumber, domestic ports. $1,219,307 

Lumber, foreign ports. 146,093 

Other exports . 53,230 

Import freight. 216,477 

Passenger earnings. 293,553 


Total . $1,928,660 


The business of Humboldt Bay (Eureka) has been carried on at great disad¬ 
vantage at times, so far as shipping is concerned. The bay has a depth of from 
27 to 49 feet in many places, while a depth of 51 feet is often found. There is a 
mean depth of 34 feet in large areas of anchorage, in which there is ample room 
for an unlimited number of vessels, provided those of larger tonnage could reach 
these favored basins at all times. There are, however, several “hogbacks” in the 
channel, separating these basins, on which may be found a mean depth of but 14 feet 
of water. There are three of these “hogbacks” interfering very materially with free 
navigation except for vessels of light draft. A judicious amount of dredging would 
make all these deeper basins available for the largest ocean vessels. The Federal 
Government is expending $75,000 in the channel in front of the city, but more than 
this is required to make practical the entire harbor. The dredging of these “hog¬ 
backs,” which are of comparatively few feet across, would be the means of largely 
increasing a business now worth more than $15,000,000 annually. There is no deep 
water at the piers, but this can be secured without much trouble, and will be as 
soon as the anchorage ground of the bay is made available by proper dredging. 
Business reasons would lead the owners to prepare for the larger vessels as soon 
as the deeper basins may have been connected, thus extending the channel. 

The future of Humboldt Bay is a promising one. At the present time lumber 
constitutes the major portion of the business, but the exportations of other com¬ 
modities are annually increasing, and as in time the manufacture of lumber will 
naturally be decreased, there will be an even more valuable trade take its place, as 
shown by the exports other than lumber during the year 1907. 


SAN PEDRO. 


1. What is the depth of water over the bar at the entrance to harbor? 

Twenty-two feet at low water. 

2. What is the average depth of channel in the harbor, and what is the area of 
anchorage ground? 

Average depth of water along the docks of inner harbor is 24 feet at low water. 
The anchorage ground is in the outer harbor, where there are about 700 acres inside 
the breakwater available for anchorage. Of this over 300 acres has a depth of 40 
feet, and there are about 400 acres with an average of 30 feet. 

On the northerly city limits the city of San Pedro has water frontage of over 
b,000 feet in that vicinity on which no wharf franchise has been granted, but 
navigable channels have to be dredged to make this frontage available for shipping. 
The Federal Government has already dredged a navigable channel up to this frontage, 
and this could be continued on in front of the city property. The Government is 
doing this dredging at a cost of eight cents a yard, as it owns the dredger. 









REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


47 


No rock has to be excavated, all the excavating being done with a suction dredger 
and the dirt removed is used for reclaiming adjoining tide lands. On the east side 
of the inner harbor, in front of the city of San Pedro, the city owns a frontage of 
over 3,000 feet, in front of which there is now an average depth of 24 feet of water 
at low tide. Back of this, to the east, the Pacific Wharf and Storage Company is 
filling in an area of SG acres. This work is nearing completion and will furnish the 
necessary grounds for railroad approach for the frontage referred to. 

In the outer harbor the city owns a water frontage, including the inside of the 
breakwater, of over 30,000 feet, on which no wharf franchise has been granted. 
There are no tide lands, properly speaking, in the outer harbor; the area not 
available for purposes of navigation would properly be described as submerged lands. 
Of this class the city has granted to Randolph II. Miner the right to fill in 153 acres, 
but reserving the right to lay out streets over this fill wherever it may deem con¬ 
venient, and has also reserved to itself a strip 1.4S0 feet long and 200 feet wide at 
the south end of the fill for dock and warehouse purposes. 

The city has granted no wharf franchises with the privilege granted Miner, he 
simply getting a fifty years’ lease on filled area. 

A similar grant of 45 acres was made to H. E. Huntington on a narrow strip 
lying east of the Miner fill, and the conditions of the grant are practically the same 
in both cases. 

On the west side of the harbor the city still owns about 214 acres of submerged 
lands, with a frontage of 8,000 feet, which could readily be filled in and made 
available for commercial purposes. 

3. What is the average depth inside the bay at piers and docks, or where piers 
and docks may be constructed? 

See answer to No. 2. 

4. How many piers and docks in your harbor are owned and operated by the State? 

None. 

5. How many piers and docks owned by the State are leased to private persons 
or corporations? 

None. 

6. How many piers and docks are owned and operated by private individuals or 
corporations? 

Nine wharves are operated by private parties and corporations, as follows: 


Southern Pacific Railway Company. 6,180 feet. 

Wilmington Transportation Company . 220 feet. 

Northern Pacific Dock Company. 420 feet. 

San Pedro Lumber Company. 1,550 feet. 

Banning Wharf Company.. 200 feet. 

Kerckhoff-Cuzner Lumber Company . S09 feet. 

National Lumber Company ..... 350 feet. 

Southern California Lumber Company. 1,500 feet. 

Crescent Wharf Company. 800 feet. 

Salt Lake Railway Company. 3,000 feet. 


7. What is the cost of each of such docks and piers, and what revenue do they 
produce to the State? 

The State owns no wharf at San Pedro. The city of San Pedro now collects the 
tolls on the wharfs here, and this year they will amount to about $3,000. 

8. What is the total number of piers and docks in your bay, how are they con¬ 
structed, and what are their estimated lives? 

The ordinary pile, unless creosoted or covered with concrete, does not last more 

than four or five years. 

9. What is the aggregate length of the piers and docks now in use? 

Fifteen thousand and seventy feet. 

10. What has been the cost of construction of your piers and docks? 

The average cost of a wharf in the inner harbor is about $40 per running foot. 












48 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


This, however, varies according to the material used in construction. The $40 
refers to the ordinary piling. 

11. What is the present condition of your docks and piers? 

They are in good condition. 

12. Are your dock facilities adequate for all demands of the trade at any season 
of the year? 

The present dockage in the inner harbor is barely sufficient for present needs, and 
will soon have to be enlarged. In the outer harbor, which is now nearing completion 
and already available for the deepest vessel built, there are no docks, and deep 
draught vessels coming to this port have to anchor in the outer harbor and discharge 
enough of the cargo by lighters to reduce their draught to less than 24 feet, so as 
to enter alongside the docks of the inner harbor. This is one of the great drawbacks 
to the development of the commercial possibilities and needs of this port, and could 
be obviated by constructing docks in the outer harbor in 35 to 40 feet of water. 

13. What pier improvements are needed in your harbor? 

Docking facilities for deep water vessels in the outer harbor is the most imme¬ 
diate need. 

14. What would be the approximate cost of such needed improvements? 

Two million five hundred thousand dollars would make the needed improvement. 

15. What improvements, if any, are expected to be made by the Federal Govern¬ 
ment; state character and probable cost of same? 

The Federal Government engineers have recommended an appropriation of $2S7,000 
to connect the west end of the breakwater with the shore ; and an appropriation 
sufficient to deepen the bar and channel of the inner harbor to an average depth of 
30 feet at low water is to be asked from the next Congress. 

16. What steps, if any, has the Federal Government taken towards making such 
improvements? 

Surveys have been made and a hearing held by the Government engineers at San 
Pedro to show the necessity therefor. The Federal Government has already spent 
nearly five millions here, and has made all the improvements excepting the docks, 
which are owned by private parties. The State has done nothing for this port 
excepting to attempt to grant away nineteen twentieths of the tide lands to private 
parties. The city of San Pedro is now* considering the advisability of constructing 
a tunnel under the city from its northerly limits to the deep water of the outer 
harbor on the south for the purpose of giving an easier entrance to railroads desiring 
to reach the outer harbor, where the State could construct wharves in 40 feet of 
water. 

17. What is private enterprise doing toward developing the shipping facilities of 
your port, and building up its commerce? 

The Southern Pacific Railroad Company has just completed a slip 250 feet wide, 
1,800 feet long, with a depth of 35 feet of water at low tide. This slip is said to’ 
have cost over $500,000. 

18. What has been the annual cost of maintenance of your docks and piers? 

That depends on the type of construction. It now costs about $50,000 per year 
to care for all of the present wharves. 

19. If wood and piling have been used in the construction of piers and docks, what 
is the average life of the piling? 

Unless protected, about five years. 

20. What are your dockage charges? 

From $3.50 to $14.75 per day, based on tonnage. Vessels 200 tons and under,. 
$3.50 per day, and 1,200 tons and over $14.75 per day. 

21. What is the cost of handling freight per ton? 

Fifty cents per ton. 

22. What warehouse charges are made on the piers and docks? 

No charge at present; there are no warehouses. 

23. What are the demurrage charges for the first twenty-four hours? 

According to agreement. 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


49 


24. How many vessels can secure dockage facilities at one time? 

About GO vessels can work at one time at the wharves. 

25. Are dockage facilities ample, or nearly so, for the present demands? 

The clocking facilities have now reached their limit and more are imperatively 
demanded. 

26. Are your tide lands owned by the State or private individuals? 

The State has attempted to grant nineteen twentieths of the tide land to private 
individuals. 


27. If portions of your tide lands are owned by individuals, give the area as nearly 
as possible of private ownership and its location? 

Seventy-five acres within the city limits of San Pedro are claimed by private 
parties under tide land patents from the State. It is claimed, however, that these 
patents are void in most cases.. 

28. What are the dockage and shipping charges proposed by owners of private 
docks and piers? 

The county board of supervisors fix these rates, to wit: $1 per ton on crude oil, 
coke, ores, grains, etc.; 60 cents on fruits, and merchandise $1.25 per ton; on 
lumber, 75 cents per 1,000 feet. 


29. From what ports is freight received, foreign and domestic? 

Coast trade with all ports, north and south, and trade with most all the foreign 
ports. 

30. What is the amount of freight in tonnage shipped to domestic and foreign 
ports? Give aggregate in each case. 

31. What is the amount of tonnage annually received? 


32. What is the amount of tonnage annually shipped? 

Answer to Questions 30, 31, and 32: 


Lumber (feet) 

Shingles. 

Shakes. 

Laths . 

Ties . 

Poles . 

Piles. 

Posts. 

Merchandise (tons) 

Sheep. 

Cattle . 

Shooks (tons) ... 
Staves (tons) .... 

Grain (tons) . 

Flour (tons) 
Cross-arms (tons) 

Peas (tons) . 

Potatoes (tons) .. 
Apples (tons) .... 
Paper (tons) 

Beer kegs (empty) 

Pickets . 

Windows . 

Doors. 

Lumber trucks . . . 

Coal (tons) . 

Sugar (tons) .... 

Beer (kegs) . 

Passengers . 

Oil (crude, bbls.) 

Foreign — 

Kopak (tons) ... 

4—JC1I 


166,405,000 

178,844,000 

3,951,000 

34,898,000 

329,242 

23,461 

9,877 

52,042 

29,912 

7,447 

2,153 

2,624 

619 

17,727 

1,864 

236 

20 

190 

6 

3,947 

1,788 

12,000 

636 

1,054 

65 

15S 

344 

270 

101,841 

491,323 

41 


Cement (bbls.) . 

50,596 

Mineral water (cases) . 

500 

Liquors (cases) . 

627 

Mustard (cases) . 

150 

Beer (in bottles, bbls.). 

110 

Merchandise (tons) . 

19 

Oak logs (feet) . 

. 1,638,325 

OUTWARD. 


Merchandise (tons) . 

20,315 

Cement (tons) . 

1,996 

Oil (bbls.) . 

28,332 

Coal (tons) .... v . 

30 

Passengers . 

104,491 

VESSELS. 


Steamers . 

1,215 

Schooners . 

277 

Rarlrc .. 

11 

Barkentines . 

44 


Ships . 

Brig . 

Barges . 

Tugs . 

Dredgers . 

Lighthouse tenders . 

U. S. cruisers . 

Foreign — 

Steamer. 

Ships . 

NET TONNAGE. 

Steam and sail. 


8 

1 

17 

19 

2 

2 

4 

1 

2 


791,377 





























































50 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


33. How many steam vessels entered your port during the year 1907? Give tonnage. 

Steamers, 1,217; net tonnage, 573,301. 

34. How many sail vessels with tonnage entered your port during the same period? 

Sailing vessels, 385; net tonnage, 217,710. 

35. What are your leading imports? 

Lumber, cement, ancl general merchandise. 

36. What are your leading exports? 

Crude oil. 

37. Where private parties own the water front land, can the title be secured by 
the State at reasonable prices without condemnation? 

Yes. 

38. What railroads have spurs to or on the piers and docks, and to what extent 
is there interference with the convenience of the public? 

Salt Lake railroad on the east side and Southern Pacific and Pacific Electric rail¬ 
roads on the San Pedro side. 

39. What interior territory in this or adjoining states may be economically served 
by shipping to or from your port? 

California to Fresno in the interior and San Luis Obispo on the coast, and all 
of southern California; east to Chicago and El Paso, and all the intervening states 
and territories. 

40. What are the immediate prospects of an increase of the shipping of your port? 

Good prospects, owing to dredging operations going on, and reclamation of lands 
and enlarging wharf facilities. 

41. What are your warehouse and railroad facilities for handling freight? 

For coasting vessels good; we have no facilities for deep water vessels. 

42. What are the prospects of an immediate enlargement of such facilities? 

Facilities for deep water vessels can be provided at a moderate cost. 

43. What, if any, suggestions have you to make to existing laws regulating harbors? 

Wherever possible provide public docks and amend the law regulating railroad 

commission so that it can do something practical. 

44. What, in your opinion, is it practical for the State to do to assist in the build¬ 
ing up of commerce at your port? 

Make an appropriation for docks in the outer harbor. 

45. If improvements are made by the State, should they, in the judgment of your 
business men, be made by direct appropriation or by the issue of bonds bearing a low 
rate of interest and covering a period of many years? 

A bond issue would be best. 

46. What are your pilotage charges? 

Five dollars per foot draft for entering inner harbor, and 5 cents per gross ton for 
entering outer harbor. 

47. What obstacles, if any, have shipping interests to contend with in your port? 

There are at present no facilities for docking deep water vessels, and San Pedro 
is not a terminal point. 

48. If, in your opinion, any of the fixed charges on shipping can be reduced, please 
make suggestions as to the best method of accomplishing such reduction. 

Municipal docks and a municipal road to Los Angeles would reduce the charges 
to one fifth of those now charged. 

49. Have any private persons or corporations attempted to monopolize the shipping 
facilities of your port or your water frontage; if so, state what persons or corpora¬ 
tions, and what, if anything, has been done to prevent such monopoly? 

No one has or can monopolize the harbor of San Pedro, as the city of San Pedro 
owns over eight miles of its own frontage and can build municipal docks wherever 
it so desires. 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


51 


OAKLAND. 

From a lepoit made to this committee by the Oakland Chamber of Commerce, 
dated April 30, 190S, the following has been gleaned: 

1 here is a depth of 25 feet over the bar, and an average depth of 20 feet in the 
channel in the center of the city, varying from 8 to 25 feet. In what is known as 
Brooklyn Basin, there is an anchorage area of 300 acres, in addition to the channel, 
which is two miles in length. There is a great variation of depth at piers or at 
places where piers may be constructed, varying from practically nothing to 25 feet. 

Ihe State owns none of the piers and docks at Oakland, of which there are 
eighteen owned by corporations and private individuals. As reports of expenses 
are not required by the State the cost of maintenance of these piers and docks can 
not be ascertained, this being a matter of private concern and subject to private 
expenditure. They are constructed entirely of wood, possessing the usual lifetime 
of wooden piers and piling. 

Oakland has about four miles of berth space, counting all the available frontage 
on piers and wharves. To accommodate shipping the city has expended about $50,000 
in docks and $1,000,000 more for dredging, and is contemplating a further expenditure 
of from $1,000,000 to $2,000,000. Other dock owners have expended over $5,000,000 
for docks and dredging. That other improvements are needed is apparent from the 
present condition of the docks, which are reported to he in only fair condition. 
There must, in addition to the improvement of the present docks, be new docks 
added, present facilities for shipping having been found to be inadequate. To remedy 
the evil of crowded docks and shallow water in the channel and at pierhead lines 
the city of Oakland has in contemplation an issue of improvement bonds, being but 
the beginning of improvements estimated to cost $25,000,000 when completed. One 
of the first steps to be taken is the dredging of the channel to an average depth of 
30 feet, a contract having been let for a portion of this work, which will amount 
to $515,000, the ultimate cost not yet having been determined. The War Depart¬ 
ment has ordered new surveys in furtherance of this work. Dredging is being 
done on private property to secure the average channel depth, while the railway 
companies contemplate projects of great magnitude which will involve the expenditure 
of millions of dollars. 

All dockage charges are regulated by city ordinances, and there seem to be no 
complaints from vessel owners or consignees regarding overcharges or discriminations. 
Until the channel can be dredged to the required depth the dockage facilities are 
reported to be ample for the demands made upon them, but present conditions are 
not favorable to the prospective increase of business, such as will naturally accrue 
to those points where commerce centers and transshipment is made from hull to 
car and from car to hull. 

The State owns the tide lands to a little beyond the old city limits, this being one 
of the few ports in which complete State ownership has not been parted with, 
although the report of the Oakland Chamber of Commerce, by inference only, 
indicates that there is a considerable private ownership. 

Some conception of the shipping business of Oakland may be obtained from the 
report of vessels entering that port from January 1, 190>>, to December 31, 190<. 
there having been 4,513 vessels, not including ferries or river steamers, having a 
total of 2,019,918 tonnage. The leading imports have been lumber and coal, while 
the exports have been principally manufactured articles and canned goods. 

The railroads doing business on the Oakland piers are the Belt Line, the Southern 
Pacific, the San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose, the Santa Fe, and the Western 
Pacific. It can be stated that the entire United States seeks this port with a 
portion of its Pacific Ocean business. The latest of these railways, the Western 
Pacific, will very materially increase the business of this port, especially from the 
Middle West and the Southern States. It naturally follows, therefore, that there 
will soon be demanded an increase of facilities, especially in the accommodation of 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


52 

the greater ocean vessels. The legal rights of the city have been established by 
favorable court decisions, so that the much needed improvements will be proceeded 
with without unnecessary delay. 

The official utterance of the Chamber of Commerce is to the effect that if improve¬ 
ments should be made by the State direct appropriations might be the proper method 
of payment, although no arguments have been advanced in support of this position, 
and possibly a vote of the members of that body would not sustain it. 

On one point there is no uncertainty—the one great obstacle that shipping interests 
have to meet is the lack of depth of water in the channel. On this one point there 
is no difference of opinion. Not only increased shipping, but constantly increasing 
size of vessels, demands greater depth in the channel than the average of 25 feet 
reported, an average that is of little value while there remains the much shallower 
waters reported. 


PORT SAN LUIS. 


Port Harford, in San Luis Obispo Bay, is about twelve miles from Port San Luis. 

The shipment of 3.000.000 barrels of oil to domestic and foreign ports, with an 
added export of 3,500 tons of cereals, and 5,000 tons of imports, give evidence of 
the importance at the present time of the future possibilities to be found in and 
about San Luis Obispo Bay. 

With a depth of 34 feet at the entrance to the channel there is an average depth 
of 30 feet in the anchorage ground of the ten square miles constituting the available 
portions of the harbor. The practical utility of this great anchorage area is shown 
from the average depth, and the mean depth inside at the piers and at the places 
where docks can be constructed. At the present time there are but two piers, one 
of these being owned by the county and the other by private parties. They cost 
.$40,000 each, estimated. As the State has no interest in these piers there is 
naturally no revenue produced for the commonwealth, although the dockage charges 
are .$5 up to 950 tons and $10 for that number and over. 

The tide lands are all owned by individuals, as is found to be the case in many 
other ports. The dockage facilities are deemed to be sufficient for all present pur¬ 
poses. Naturally the demands made upon them are by the oil interests to a very 
large degree, interests that may be extended in volume, and which may follow the 
results of continued production, as found in other oil fields. 

The Federal Government has taken the preliminary steps toward providing a 
breakwater, which has been under construction several years, the work being done 
on its extension. A small appropriation has been made for that purpose. Private 
enterprise, content with the present facilities in the way of dockage, does not seem 
to be adding to the present accommodations, there being room at the present time 
for eight vessels at the piers at one time, possibly a greater provision than has ever 
been taxed for use. 

During the year 1907 the vessels calling at this port were as follows: sailing 
vessels. 21; steamers, 327; tugs, 65; barges, 85; gasoline schooners, 12. 

Mr. Myron Angel, under date of January 25, 1908. wrote this committee a letter 
dealing with the present advantages and the future possibilities of Port San Luis, 
from which the following extracts have been made : 

“San Luis Obispo, Cal., January 25, 190S. 
“A. F. Fitzgerald, Esq., President Chamber of Commerce, San Luis Obispo, Cal. 

“The view obtained from the bay by the passing traveler is not impressive of the 
resources of the country the harbor is to serve; even our own county people seldom 
contemplate the vast area to be accommodated commercially by the harbor of San 
Luis Obispo, and to which a perfectly protected harbor, free from monopoly, is a 
necessity. The area concisely stated, is fully fifteen thousand square miles of exceed¬ 
ingly productive country. This is immediate—the area may be greatly enlarged in 
the future. To be more explicit, the region to be benefited by a good harbor at the 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


53 


bay of San Luis Obispo is bounded on the north by the valley of the Nacimiento 
extended east to crossing of the Monte Diablo range by a low pass of 1,500 feet, then 
northerly, including Fresno; east by the Sierra Nevada, and south by the Tehachapi 
and the Santa Inez Mountains. All this area used the harbor by wagon transporta¬ 
tion before the construction of the Pacific railroad through the San Joaquin Valley. 

“In resources for the comfort and wealth of mankind this section as outlined is 
unsurpassed by any equal area on earth, being of soil and surface elements of great 
value, and beneath the fertile soil minerals in abundance and variety, explored to a 
depth of 4,000 feet, finding oil, clays, cement, and other rocks, sand, sulphur, soda, 
salt and other substances of utility of manufacturing and commercial value. 

“The immediate area now using the harbor is that west of the Monte Diablo 
range and north of the Santa Ynez, equal in extent to that of the states of Connecti¬ 
cut and Rhod£ Island combined. I have included the county of Fresno in the 
ultimate area when the harbor is completed and transportation to it perfected. It 
is not usually understood that the distance from the city of Fresno to the harbor 
of San Luis Obispo is precisely the same as to the harbor of Monterey, while the 
mountain passes leading to San Luis Obispo are of less elevation and the route 
much more feasible for a railroad.” 


SANTA BARBARA. 


' There is an average depth of water at Santa Barbara of from 7 to 10 fathoms, 
with from 4 to G fathoms at points where piers may be constructed. There is but 
one pier, owned by private parties, constructed at a cost of $125,000, this being 2,300 
feet in length, and which pays a State license. Some repairs on this pier are needed 
at the present time, the estimated cost of which is $30,000. This, however, is a 
private matter. The dock charge is $10 for each steamer taking berth room at the 
dock. There being room for six vessels at one time, the present dockage facilities 
are considered ample. 

The tide lands at Santa Barbara are partly owned by the State, and as no com¬ 
mercial demands will likely be made upon them the ownership will in all probability 
remain as at present. 

The tonnage, being business principally with San Francisco, Los Angeles, and 
San Diego, for 1007, amounted to 13,000 tons of incoming and outgoing freight, 
consisting of general merchandise, grain, lemons, beans, and walnuts. No pretense 
is made at serving interior points in competition with the ports north or south, owing 
to lack of railroad and other facilities. There is no immediate prospect of an 
increase in the shipping at Santa Barbara, local conditions being fully served. The 
business men of this place have expressed an interest in the conditions at Port San 
Luis, and expressed a desire that this committee pay especial attention to conditions 
at that place. 

Having nothing to suggest for Santa Barbara in the way of improvements by the 
State, the Chamber of Commerce of that place indorses the plan of long-time bonds 
at low rate of interest to secure funds for improvements to be made in harbors 
where State assistance is required. 


54 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


NEWPORT BAY. 


Newport Bay, a beautiful sheet of water enclosed on three sides by commanding 
hills and on the ocean side by a sand peninsula that has been utilized by a railroad, 
an electric line and by town builders, is at the present time a pleasure resort, 
although with aid from the Federal Government in the way of building twin jetties 
it can be made a profitable business point. The depth of water over the bar is but 
4 14 feet at mean low tide, increasing to 10 feet at mean high tide. There was a 
time when the depth was so much greater that vessels of considerable size entered 
this bay and passed up the channel two or more miles before unloading. The drift 
of sand has never been interfered with, until at the present time ^the entrance to 
the bay is practically closed. Only twin jetties and much dredging can render the 
bay serviceable in any degree. Within the bay is a channel three miles long and 600 
feet wide, varying in depth from 8 to 12 feet, with some locations showing greater 
depth. It has been estimated that a depth of 20 feet can be secured over an increased 
area by dredging, which would bring the same depth to the pierhead line. 

There are a number of small piers, built to accommodate the pleasure demands, 
there being no other call upon them. There are no docks. The Southern Pacific 
has a pier extending into the ocean on which has been expended much money, and 
which, affording dockage for two vessels at one time, is deemed adequate for all 
present demands. 

The tide lands in the bay are owned by both the State and by private individuals, 
the former possessing about 1,000 acres and the latter about 1,500 acres. Should 
the State ever have need of the lands owned by private parties there will be no 
trouble in securing title at reasonable figures without condemnation proceedings. 

The Pacific Electric Railway Company and the Newport Beach Dredging Company 
have been granted permission to dredge the channel in the bay covering one and one 
half miles in length and averaging 500 feet in width. But this improvement is not 
intended for commercial purposes, nor will there be need for such until the con¬ 
struction of twin jetties by the Federal Government. The business men of Newport 
express the hope that the State will take some steps whereby the Federal Govern¬ 
ment will be induced to make the desired appropriation. It is their opinion that 
whatever improvements may be made by the State at and in harbors should be by a 
bonded issue of long time bearing low interest. 

The following, by Lew II. Wallace, secretary of the Newport Beach Chamber of 
Commerce, is a comprehensive review of past conditions and suggestions of what 
may be: 

“Records show that in 1873 the steamer at Newport plied between San Francisco 
and Old Newport wharf, three miles inside of the entrance. This steamer made the 
trip twice a month, bringing merchandise, which was freighted by team to Santa Ana, 
San Bernardino, and as far inland as Arizona, and New Mexico. She always 
returned fully loaded with cargoes of grain, hay, barley, honey, peanuts; in fact, 
products of every description, as well as ores from the mines. This continued until 
1888, when an outside wharf 1,200 feet long and 60 feet wide was constructed. 
With the increased facilities for handling, commerce increased immediately to two 
steamers per week which loaded and unloaded full cargoes the full year around until 
1891. Commerce increased to such an extent in this year that an extra passenger 
steamer, with a cargo capacity, was added to the list of regular weekly service, 
thus making three steamers a week operating on a regular time schedule. Imports 
consisted of lumber and every known commodity. Exports became so heavy that 
the three regular steamers could not handle the trade, and many tramp steamers were 
called to this point to take care of surplus traffic. During this time Newport was 
the extreme southern port for the steamers Coos Bay, Santa Cruz, Eureka, and 
Bonita, owned by the Pacific Coast Steamship Company. During this period and 
the following years large numbers of cattle and sheep were carried from this port. 
In 1893 the steamer A1 Ivi carried from this port the largest cargo of grain which 


REPORT OF JOINT COMMITTEE ON HARBORS. 


55 


up to that time had entered Golden Gate, This cargo consisted of 20.000 sacks of 
barley or 110 carloads ; and in the same year there was landed on this wharf a 
cargo of 105 carloads of lumber, or nearly one million feet by the four-masted 
schooner Prosper. Beginning February, 1894, and continuing until June, 1899, 
the amount of lumber landed at this port would indicate the volume of imports 
that would be handled if adequate improvements and facilities were established. 
The figures covering the shipments from one wharf only during this period showed 
an average of 365 cargoes yearly, or more than one cargo a day, because the owners 
of the wharf and short railroad line at this time refused to operate on Sunday. 
These cargoes average 640,000 feet of lumber to the cargo, and records show that 
this was distributed to practically every commercial center known in the United 
States. In addition to this the regular three steamers a week unloaded and loaded 
at this port, with many tramp steamers interspersed. In June, 1899. the wharf and 
railroad line to the interior passed into the hands of the Southern Pacific Railway 
Company, which effectually cut off the Santa Fe Railway feeding from this port. 
Immediately upon the acquisition of this property by the Southern Pacific commerce 
and trade stopped, and where, within a week or two prior to this transaction, there 
were as many as five to seven steamers and schooners waiting their turn to discharge 
their cargo, the week following the change of ownership there was but an occasional 
vessel that stopped at this port. This data was obtained from the books of the 
wharf box for the private road and wharf during the years 188S to 1899." 













■ 






. 

' 
















' 

_ 




* 





















INDEX. 


Resolutions Providing for Joint Committee. 

Members of Joint Committee. 

Meetings Held. 

San Francisco . 

Requirements at San Francisco. 

Law needed for abatement of nuisances. 

Change in law relating to Pilot Commissioners asked for 
High rate for dockage and excessive charges for water. . 

t 

San Pedro... 

Area of San Pedro inner and outer harbors. 

Dockage . 

Commerce . 

Committee meetings. 

Titles to water front. 

Possible litigation ... 

Humboldt Bay... 

Possibilities of port... 

Necessity for dredging. 

Damage to jetties. 

Tide lands ... 

Recommendation for improvement. 

San Diego. 

Description of bay area, improvements and commerce.. 

Need for a seawall. 

Water front ownership. 

Work of Federal Government. 

Oakland . 

Dockage and commerce. 

Dredging required . 

Improvements required . 

Monterey Bay ... 

Early shipping point.'. 

Obstacles to shipping... 

Commerce . 

Breakwater needed . 

Ownership of water front. 

Port San Luis. 

Oil shipments . 

Area of harbor. 

Ownership of tide lands. 

Santa Barbara . 

Shipping point and pleasure resort. 

Newport Beach . 

Once a shipping point. 

Twin jetties needed. 


Page. 


4-20-31 


5 


6 

6 


13-46 

13 

13 

13 

14 
14 
14 


11-45 

11 

11 

12 

12 

12 


7-41 

8 

8 

10 

11 

15-51 

15 

15 

15 

16 
16 
16 
16 
16 
16 

17-52 

17 

17 

17 

17-53 

17 

17-54 

17 

17 


o—JCH 
















































58 


INDEX. 


Petaluma and San Rafael. 

Expenditures at San Rafael. 

Estimated cost of improvements. 

Straightening channel of river. 

Necessity for PIarbor Improvements. 

Manufacturing possibilities . 

Water power and its relation to harbors. 

Manufacturing and its relation to harbors. 

California’s Principal Harbor. 

Its present and its future. 

Greater facilities necessary. 

Work of preparing for the future. 

Plans of extension.. ... 

Cost of contemplated improvements.:. 

Territory tributary to San Francisco. 

Necessity for State Action.. 

Water front conditions at San Diego. 

San Diego first port of call from south. . . * . 

Present facilities at San Francisco and San Diego not favorable for future 
commerce . 

California Harbors and Latin Republics. 

Closer trade relations with Latin_ Republics. 

Comparison of trade with Orient. 

Improvement of harbors necessary. 

Securing information of resources. 


Page. 

17 

17 

IS 

IS 

IS 

IS 

IS 

19 

20 
20 
20 
21 
21 
22 
22 

23 

23 

23 


23 


21 

24 

24 

25 


Advisory Board of Harbor Commissioners .. 25 

Amendment to Political Code recommended. 25 

Desirability of Advisory Board of Harbor Commissioners. 25 

How such Board should be constituted. 25 


Conclusions . 

Present facilities inadequate. 

Returns to State through improvements 

Ownership of wharves. 

Improvements, how to be made. 

Recommendations . 

For San Francisco . 

For San Diego. 

For Humboldt . 

For Petaluma . 

For San Rafael. 

For Oakland . 

For San Pedro. 


26 

26 

26 

26 


2S 

2S 

28 

28 

28 

2S 















































INDEX. 


Resolutions Providing for Joint Committee. 

Members of Joint Committee. 

Meetings Held . 

San Francisco . 

Requirements at San Francisco. 

Law needed for abatement of nuisances. 

Change in law relating to Pilot Commissioners asked for 
High rate for dockage and excessive charges for water. . 

San Pedro. 

Area of San Pedro inner and outer harbors. 

Dockage . 

Commerce . 

Committee meetings. 

Titles to water front. 

Possible litigation . 

Humboldt Bay. 

Possibilities of port. 

Necessity for dredging. 

Damage to jetties. 

Tide lands . 

Recommendation for improvement. 

San Diego. 

Description of bay area, improvements and commerce. . 

Need for a seawall. 

Water front ownership. 

Work of Federal Government. 

Oakland .. 

Dockage and commerce. 

Dredging required ... 

Improvements required . 

Monterey Bay . 

Early shipping point. 

Obstacles to shipping. 

Commerce . 

Breakwater needed . 

Ownership of water front. 

Port San Luis. 

Oil shipments . 

Area of harbor... 

Ownership of tide lands. 

Santa Barbara . 

Shipping point and pleasure resort. 

Newport Beach . 

Once a shipping point. 

Twin jetties needed. 


Page. 

o 

O 

o 

O 

3 

4 - 20-31 

5 
0 

6 
7 


13-46 

13 

13 

13 

14 
14 

14 

11-45 

11 

11 

12 

12 

12 

7-41 

s • 
8 

10 

11 

15-51 

15 
15 

15 

16 
16 
16 
16 
16 
16 

17-52 

17 

17 

17 

17-53 

17 

17-54 

17 

17 


D —JCH 
















































58 


INDEX. 


Petaluma and San Rafael. 

Expenditures at San Rafael. 

Estimated cost of improvements. 

Straightening channel of river. 

Necessity for Harbor Improvements. 

Manufacturing possibilities . 

Water power and its relation to harbors. 

Manufacturing and its relation to harbors. 

California’s Principal Harbor. 

Its present and its future. 

Greater facilities necessary. 

Work of preparing for the future. 

Plans of extension. 

Cost of contemplated improvements. 

Territory tributary to San Francisco. 

Necessity for State Action. 

Water front conditions at San Diego. 

San Diego first port of call from south. 

Present facilities at San Francisco and San Diego not favorable for future 
commerce . 

California Harbors and Latin Republics. 

Closer trade relations with Latin Republics. 

Comparison of trade with Orient. 

Improvement of harbors necessary... 

Securing information of resources. 

Advisory Board of Harbor Commissioners. 

Amendment to Political Code recommended. 

Desirability of Advisory Board of Harbor Commissioners. 

How such Board should be constituted. 

Conclusions . 

Present facilities inadequate. 

Returns to State through improvements. 

Ownership of wharves. 

Improvements, how to be made. 

Recommendations . 

For San Francisco . 

For San Diego. 

For Humboldt . 

For Petaluma. 

For San Rafael. 

For Oakland . 

For San Pedro. 














































* v" ^ 

o o .vv,- 

c\ <<y 4 *v.> O v % 

" ^ <4 • *3*7*. % a- 

r ^ * 


yj^i. \ 


"v- '••** a 0 ' ^ *-'TTT*' A <. 

qV c o n O ^ - ^_ ) <^V t # ^ 


v*V 

-♦ : 
°. »•*&*- % 

■ f v C * <■• 

•*,. A '^|V. 



<-. <&*%. \ 

"M’i*' A <*, ■'?.T*' 1 .o 5- ^ 

<& „ t • 6 <P /-Jv o N G *£* 

a ^ %, c° . < uW% ° 0 


♦ A*^' 

L° N#> A < 

/ .^ Vv V • 

/ ^ <y ^ ' 

A <*,* 

A ^ •*•'*♦ <$ 

* ’ *<T ‘ 



* < 7^yy/iu v v *$*■ , 

°0 * rT> *■*■>■ * 

* < ’ A 0 ^S> * » . • • A 

^ v 

A , l *IIV. ^ A , 



; ^ °* 

„ - / ^ o ** 

■ ® N 0 A, C> 

<> V N * < * O, %, 


J> ^ 

* v 4*. 

<y 



*$> A Y ♦ 4\¥A,° <4- * 

^ ^ \ 

A 

0 ° ♦ O A ^ * L ' " ^ 


o * 

_ ^ \V O ‘•/i* ,C 

0 s s „M'* > A , t* 0<r 

V A V * MA° c> * 





_ ♦ r\ •<£* ^ 

-•’ .o° 

^ . v . 


Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Jan. 2004 


^ txj/v ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ - 

° ^ v ‘' ow0 ° ^ ~*77i PreservationTechnologies 

J. Ai' v 4 J^U#^. <r A ^ **&*£'. A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

*■ •O'A ♦ <* 111 Thomson Park Drive 

kP Cranberry Township, PA 16066 

/• - \\N\V-1—* vP v 


aVA 



(724) 779-2111 






o A 

^O A % . L * . <b n$ 

~y \J - -' o < 1*D' y AGrS/y?*? f 

^ 0* &“ ^o ^turS 






^ *.;-.• A %‘^V \.^^*\^ k °o ***..■ 

✓ * * * °* c\ Ay c, s V^ A » * 0<r 

Af\^^/iV at .-£>. ^>. *-.(S^^% r£, 




,-y 



.A t 

u. - *N * 

* A * 

_ O > » 

O . *■ * <0 »7* 

' N ’ _ *■ cyy/jUsgi j. /-i ^£» </> 

o* A o. **,,-,•* A 0° A 


V »I* 


A. 


O , 1 


A* 

V^ v 


<* v a 9 ^ L./-W/ -v -A 

* *r. /p 1 .•£. 

° cy * ^ 

° Av 

4* A ^ ^ ^ ‘JW* ^ ^ _ , 

A c> *'.>*s s A > * <0 o *'*<,5* A 

Q V j, 0 N 0 /» ( i / * ^ 0 ’ 0 0 N c ^ ^O ( 1 1 i 





« A *> 


> 2>°^ ‘ffcgW «5 ^ 

+ r\ *£» *^ k '*A\V'*y > ' tv 

*• 1 ^ _ <?> ® n o 





© N 


C\ A 

1« y P jK /A *• 
h 0 <?^ <A * 

' h °. Av 


S ^ v / 



A V * * * °- cx 

; *W* ° 


<f\ ’"o A * <0 


* A •* 

^ ^, v v ^* «* 



o. v.s 4 A 


A^> * 

* *V 0 



<v *o * '* - <6 





^ G • 
: ^ •' 


0 V o°^°^ 'O. 


: ^5°^ 

O v 1 - * - 



A t 0 ' ” * 


o N ( 




O. *’««•»'* .O' 






r V^ v • 
* Avp, 


A ><-v o 



o’ A 

* "%U VXV^r* *“ K v 

<0^ s S * • ' < ^> f y • o, 

• ^ <A ^ A ^ 

: W ;MMkl A- 

■• A ^ -* o 

-4 ^y «» 




0 A 


A v'r.T 4 ' /v ^ *'?.»•■ .& v -^5 ^T.T«- A 

0 N O ^ «Jk.^ * L # fl <9 Q' 0 0 N ° a 1 # 

0 ~rv. - " 0 * '~ sSNx ^ t!> 'A fc 



















































































